Carbamoyl Triazolinone Based Herbicide Combinations and Method of Use

ABSTRACT

The invention relates to herbicidal active compound combinations comprising, carbamoyltriazolinones, and herbicidally active compounds, which combinations are suitable for controlling weeds.

RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation-in-part of application Ser. No.12/796,511, filed Jun. 8, 2010, and claims priority to application Ser.No. 61/747,963, filed Dec. 31, 2012, and application Ser. No.61/185,363, filed Jun. 9, 2009, each of which applications are expresslyincorporated by reference herein in their entirety.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The invention relates to herbicidal, active compound combinationscomposed of known carbamoyltriazolinones and herbicidally activecompounds, which can be used successfully for controlling weeds.

INTRODUCTION

Herbicides play an important role for weed control in crop production.Applying combinations of herbicidal compounds may enhance the herbicidaleffectiveness.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES

FIG. 1 shows a carbamoyltriazolinone of the general formula (I).

FIG. 2A shows a bar graph plot showing the injury effect of amicarbazone(4-amino-5-oxo-3-propan-2-yl-n-tert-butyl-1,2,4-triazole-1-carboxamide)and mesotrione(2-[4-(methylsulfonyl)-2-nitrobenzoyl]-1,3-cyclohexanedione) alone andin combination at different concentrations on Mustard (Sinapsis sp.) tendays after application.

FIG. 2B shows a bar graph plot showing the bleaching effect ofamicarbazone and mesotrione alone and in combination at differentconcentrations on Mustard (Sinapsis sp.) seven days after application.

FIG. 3A shows a bar graph plot showing the injury effect of amicarbazoneand mesotrione alone and in combination at different concentrations onPoa annua at 10, 14, and 20 days after application.

FIG. 3B shows a bar graph plot showing the injury effect of amicarbazoneand mesotrione alone and in combination at different concentrations onPoa annua at 24, 31, and 41 days after application.

FIG. 4A shows a bar graph plot showing the injury effect of amicarbazoneand mesotrione alone and in combination at different concentrations onGreen Foxtail at 7 and 14 days after application.

FIG. 4B shows another bar graph plot showing the injury effect ofamicarbazone and mesotrione alone and in combination at differentconcentrations on Green Foxtail at 7 and 14 days after application.

FIG. 4C shows a bar graph plot showing the bleaching effect ofamicarbazone and mesotrione alone and in combination at differentconcentrations on Green Foxtail at 10, 14, and 20 days afterapplication.

FIG. 5A shows a bar graph plot showing the injury effect of amicarbazoneand mesotrione alone and in combination at different concentrations onCrabgrass sp. at 7, 14, and 24 days after application.

FIG. 5B shows another bar graph plot showing the injury effect ofamicarbazone and mesotrione alone and in combination at differentconcentrations on Crabgrass sp. at 7, 14, and 24 days after application.

FIG. 5C shows a bar graph plot showing the bleaching effect ofamicarbazone and mesotrione alone and in combination at differentconcentrations on Crabgrass sp. at 7, 14, and 20 days after application.

FIG. 5D shows a bar graph plot showing the effect on density ofamicarbazone and mesotrione alone and in combination at differentconcentrations on Crabgrass sp. at 31 days after application.

FIG. 6A shows a comparative weed control chart with tank mixtures ofDINAMIC® 700 WDG (amicarbazone, 700 g/kg) at 75 g/ha with Galago(mesotrione, 480 g/L) and with Galago plus TOLLA 840 S (metolachlor,i.e. chloroacetamide, 840 g/L+Safener (dichlormid, i.e.2,2-dichloro-N,N-di-2-propenyl acetamide)). Weed species are Bidenspilosa (BIDPI), Portulaca oleracea (POROL), Anoda cristata (ANOCR), andConvolvulus arvensis (CONAR).

FIG. 6B shows a comparative weed control chart with tank mixtures ofDINAMIC® 700 WDG at 100 g/ha with Galago and with Galago plus TOLLA 840S. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 6A.

FIG. 6C shows a comparative weed control chart with tank mixtures ofDINAMIC® 700 WDG at 125 g/ha with Galago and with Galago plus TOLLA 840S. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 6A.

FIG. 6D shows a comparative weed control chart with tank mixtures ofDINAMIC® 700 WDG with Galago plus TOLLA 840 S versus a standard tankmixture of CALLISTO® (mesotrione, 480 g/L) plus DUAL S GOLD®(S-metolachlor, 915 g/L+Safener). Weed species are the same as in FIG.6A.

FIG. 6E shows a comparative grain yield chart of 13 different tankmixture combinations employing DINAMIC® 700 WDG (Lanes 1-13). Lane 14 isCALLISTO® plus DUAL S GOLD®. Lane 15 is an untreated control.

FIG. 7A shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 75 g/ha with Galago and with Galago plus TOLLA840 S. Weed species are Datura ferox (DATFE), Portulaca oleracea,(POROL), Schkuhria pinnata (SCHPI), and Bidens pilosa (BIDPI).

FIG. 7B shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 100 g/ha with Galago and with Galago plus TOLLA840 S. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 7A.

FIG. 7C shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 125 g/ha with Galago and with Galago plus TOLLA840 S. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 7A.

FIG. 7D shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG with Galago plus TOLLA 840 S versus a standard tankmixture of CALLISTO® plus DUAL S GOLD®. Weed species are the same as inFIG. 7A.

FIG. 7E shows another comparative grain yield chart of 13 different tankmixture combinations employing DINAMIC® 700 WDG (Lanes 1-13). Lane 14 isCALLISTO® plus DUAL S GOLD®. Lane 15 is an untreated control.

FIG. 8A shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 75 g/ha with Galago and with Galago plus TOLLA.Weed species are Bidens pilosa (BIDPI), Amaranthus hybridus (AMAHY),Tagetes minuta (TAGMI), and Digitaria sanquinalis (DIGSA).

FIG. 8B shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 100 g/ha with Galago and with Galago plus TOLLA840 S. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 8A.

FIG. 8C shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 125 g/ha with Galago and with Galago plus TOLLA840 S. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 8A.

FIG. 8D shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG with Galago plus TOLLA 840 S versus a standard tankmixture of CALLISTO® plus DUAL S GOLD®. Weed species are the same as inFIG. 8A.

FIG. 8E shows another comparative grain yield chart of 13 different tankmixture combinations employing DINAMIC® 700 WDG (Lanes 1-13). Lane 14 isCALLISTO® plus DUAL S GOLD®. Lane 15 is an untreated control.

FIG. 9A shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 75 g/ha with Galago plus Wet-All (alcoholethoxylate, non-ionic surfactant) and with Galago plus TOLLA960(metolachlor, 960 g/L) plus Wet-All. Weed species are Datura ferox(DATFE), Schkuhria pinnata (SCHPI), Portulaca oleracea (POROL) andCyperus esculentus (CYPES).

FIG. 9B shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 100 g/ha with Galago plus Wet-All and with Galagoplus TOLLA 960 plus Wet-All. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 9A.

FIG. 9C shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 125 g/ha with Galago plus Wet-All and with Galagoplus TOLLA 960 plus Wet-All. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 9A.

FIG. 9D shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG with Galago plus TOLLA 960 plus Wet-All versus astandard tank mixture of CALLISTO® plus GARDO® Gold (S-metolachlor plusterbuthylazine(N-tert-butyl-6-chloro-N-ethyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine)) plusCOMPLEMENT® Super (Polyether-polymethylsiloxane copolymer, 1000 g/L).Weed species are the same as in FIG. 9A.

FIG. 9E shows another comparative grain yield chart of 13 different tankmixture combinations employing DINAMIC® 700 WDG (Lanes 1-13). Lane 14 isCALLISTO® plus GARDO® Gold plus COMPLEMENT® Super. Lane 15 is anuntreated control.

FIG. 10A shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 75 g/ha with Galago plus Wet-All and with Galagoplus TOLLA 960 plus Wet-All. Weed species are Amaranthus hybridus(AMAHY), Bidens pilosa (BIDPI), Tagetes minuta (TAGMI), Portulacaoleracea (POROL), and Commelina benghalensis (COMBE).

FIG. 10B shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 100 g/ha with Galago plus Wet-All and with Galagoplus TOLLA 960 plus Wet-All. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 10A.

FIG. 10C shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 125 g/ha with Galago plus Wet-All and with Galagoplus TOLLA 960 plus Wet-All. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 10A.

FIG. 10D shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG with Galago plus TOLLA 960 plus Wet-All versus astandard tank mixture of CALLISTO® plus GARDO® Gold plus COMPLEMENT®Super. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 10A.

FIG. 10E shows another comparative grain yield chart of 13 differenttank mixture combinations employing DINAMIC® 700 WDG (1-13). Lane 14 isCALLISTO® plus GARDO® Gold plus COMPLEMENT® Super. Lane 15 is anuntreated control.

FIG. 11A shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 75 g/ha with Galago plus Wet-All and with Galagoplus TOLLA 960 plus Wet-All. Weed species are Bidens pilosa (BIDPI),Portulaca oleracea (POROL), Convolvulus arvensis (CONAR), and Anodacristata (ANOCR).

FIG. 11B shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 100 g/ha with Galago plus Wet-All and with Galagoplus TOLLA 960 plus Wet-All. Weed species are the same as FIG. 11A.

FIG. 11C shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG at 125 g/ha with Galago plus Wet-All and with Galagoplus TOLLA 960 plus Wet-All. Weed species are the same as FIG. 11A.

FIG. 11D shows another comparative weed control chart with tank mixturesof DINAMIC® 700 WDG with Galago plus TOLLA 960 plus Wet-All versus astandard tank mixture of CALLISTO® plus GARDO® Gold plus COMPLEMENT®Super. Weed species are the same as in FIG. 11A.

FIG. 11E shows another comparative grain yield chart of 13 differenttank mixture combinations employing DINAMIC® 700 WDG (Lanes 1-13). Lane14 is CALLISTO® plus GARDO® Gold plus COMPLEMENT® Super. Lane 15 is anuntreated control.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Embodiments herein, accordingly, provides compositions comprising asynergistic effective amount of a combination of a first compound and asecond component, wherein said first compound is a compound of theformula (I)

wherein:

R₁ is selected from the group consisting of hydrogen, hydroxyl, amino,or in each case optionally substituted alkyl, alkenyl, alkinyl, alkoxy,alkenyloxy, alkinyloxy, alkylamino, alkenylamino, alkenylamino,alkylideneamino, dialkylamino, cycloalkyl, cycloalkylalkyl, aryl andarylalkyl, any of which may be optionally substituted;

R₂ is selected from the group consisting of alkyl, alkenyl, alkinyl,alkoxy, alkenyloxy, alkinyloxy, alkylthio, alkenylthio, alkinylthio,alkylamino, alkenylamino, alkinylamino, dialkylamino, cycloalkyl,cycloalkyloxy, cycloalkylalkyl, aryl, aryloxy, arylthio, arylamino andarylalkyl, any of which may be optionally substituted;

R₃ is selected from the group consisting of alkyl, alkenyl, alkinyl,cycloalkyl, cycloalkylalkyl, arylalkyl, arylalkenyl and arylalkinyl, anyof which may be optionally substituted; and

said second component is selected from2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone,3-cyclohexyl-6-dimethylamino-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione,4-methyl-2-chlorophenoxyacetic acid,2-chloro-4-(ethylamine)-6-(isopropylamine)-s-triazine,2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1-methylethoxy)methyl]acetamide,an herbicide of the chloroacetamide class, (aka, the chloroacetanilideclass) and mixtures thereof.

In various aspects, an herbicide of the chloroacetamide class include2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1-methylethoxy)methyl]acetamide(Propisochlor), 2-chloro-N-ethoxymethyl-6′-ethylacet-o-toluidide(Acetochlor),2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide,(Metolachlor),2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1S)-2-methoxy-1-methylethyl]acetamide(S-Metolachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(methoxymethyl)acetamide (Alachlor),and N-(butoxymethyl)-2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)acetamide(Butachlor),N-[[(2Z)-2-butenyloxy]methyl]-2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)acetamide(Butenachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-[(2-methylpropoxy)methyl]acetamide(Delachlor), N-(chloroacetyl)-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)glycine (Diethatyl),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxyethyl)acetamide(Dimethachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(1H-pyrazol-1-ylmethyl)acetamide(Metazachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(2-propoxyethyl)acetamide(Pretilachlor), 2-chloro-N-(1-methylethyl)-N-phenylacetamide(Propachlor), 2-chloro-N-(1-methyl-2-propynyl)-N-phenylacetamide(Prynachlor),N-(butoxymethyl)-2-chloro-N-[2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-6-methylphenyl]acetamide(Terbuchlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-[(3-methoxy-2-thienyl)methyl]acetamide(Thenylchlor), and2-chloro-N-(2,3-dimethylphenyl)-N-(1-methylethyl)acetamide (Xylachlor).

In one embodiment, R₁ is an optionally substituted amino. In a furtherembodiment, R₁ is NH₂. In one embodiment, R₂ is an optionallysubstituted alkyl. In a further embodiment, R₂ is i-propyl. In oneembodiment, R₃ is an optionally substituted alkyl. In a furtherembodiment, R₃ is t-butyl.

In certain embodiments, a first compound is4-amino-5-isopropyl-2-(tert-butyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one.In certain embodiments, a second component is2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1-methylethoxy)methyl]acetamide.In certain embodiments, a second component is2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone and3-cyclohexyl-6-dimethylamino-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione.In certain embodiments, a second component is4-methyl-2-chlorophenoxyacetic acid.

In another embodiment, a composition further includes an adjuvant. In afurther embodiment, an adjuvant is an ethoxylated propoxylated fattyamine or a polyether-polymethylsiloxane-copolymer. In yet a furtherembodiment, a composition further includes a herbicidally acceptablediluent or carrier.

In one embodiment, a second component is present in the composition inan amount ranging from 0.001 to 1000 parts by weight per part by weightof the first component. In a further embodiment, a second component ispresent in the composition in an amount ranging from 0.02 to 500 partsby weight per part by weight of the first component. In yet a furtherembodiment, a second component is present in the composition in anamount ranging from 0.05 to 100 parts by weight per part by weight ofthe first component.

In another embodiment of the invention, a composition is in a solid orliquid form of an emulsifiable concentrate, wettable powder, granule,dust, oil spray or aerosol.

In embodiments, compositions described herein provides synergisticcontrol of one or more weeds. In one embodiment, a weed is Amaranthus,Digitaria, Cyperus or Euphorbia.

Embodiments herein also provide methods for selective control of weeds.In one aspect, a method includes contacting a composition comprising asynergistic effective amount of a combination of a first compound and asecond component onto a crop plant or a non-crop area in need of weedcontrol or at risk of undesirable weeds, in an amount effective toprovide weed control in the crop, wherein said first compound is acompound of the formula (I)

wherein:

R₁ is selected from the group consisting of hydrogen, hydroxyl, amino,or in each case optionally substituted alkyl, alkenyl, alkinyl, alkoxy,alkenyloxy, alkinyloxy, alkylamino, alkenylamino, alkenylamino,alkylideneamino, dialkylamino, cycloalkyl, cycloalkylalkyl, aryl andarylalkyl, any of which may be optionally substituted;

R₂ is selected from the group consisting of alkyl, alkenyl, alkinyl,alkoxy, alkenyloxy, alkinyloxy, alkylthio, alkenylthio, alkinylthio,alkylamino, alkenylamino, alkinylamino, dialkylamino, cycloalkyl,cycloalkyloxy, cycloalkylalkyl, aryl, aryloxy, arylthio, arylamino andarylalkyl, any of which may be optionally substituted;

R₃ is selected from the group consisting of alkyl, alkenyl, alkinyl,cycloalkyl, cycloalkylalkyl, arylalkyl, arylalkenyl and arylalkinyl, anyof which may be optionally substituted; and

said second component is selected from2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone,3-cyclohexyl-6-dimethylamino-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione,4-methyl-2-chlorophenoxyacetic acid,2-chloro-4-(ethylamine)-6-(isopropylamine)-s-triazine,N-ethyl-N′-(1-methylethyl)-6-(methylthio)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine,N-(3,4-dichlophenyl)-N,N-dimethyl urea,5-cyclopropyl-4-(2-methylsulfonyl-4-trifluoromethylbenzoyl)isoxazole,4-amino-6-tert-butyl-4,5-dihydro-3-methylthio-1,2,4-triazin-5-one,1-(5-tert-butyl-1,3,4-thiadiazol-2-yl)-1,3-dimethylurea,2′,4′-dichloro-5′-(4-difluoromethyl-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)methanesulfonanilide,2-(4-mesyl-2-nitrobenzoyl)cyclohexane-1,3-dione,N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine, dimethylamine salt of2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, an herbicide of the chloroacetamideclass, and mixtures thereof.

In various aspects, an herbicide of the chloroacetamide class includes2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1-methylethoxy)methyl]acetamide(Propisochlor), 2-chloro-N-ethoxymethyl-6′-ethylacet-o-toluidide(Acetochlor),2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide(Metolachlor),2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1S)-2-methoxy-1-methylethyl]acetamide(S-Metolachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(methoxymethyl)acetamide (Alachlor),and N-(butoxymethyl)-2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)acetamide(Butachlor),N-[[(2Z)-2-butenyloxy]methyl]-2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)acetamide(Butenachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-[(2-methylpropoxy)methyl]acetamide(Delachlor), N-(chloroacetyl)-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)glycine(Diethatyl),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxyethyl)acetamide(Dimethachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(1H-pyrazol-1-ylmethyl)acetamide(Metazachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(2-propoxyethyl)acetamide(Pretilachlor), 2-chloro-N-(1-methylethyl)-N-phenylacetamide(Propachlor), 2-chloro-N-(1-methyl-2-propynyl)-N-phenylacetamide(Prynachlor),N-(butoxymethyl)-2-chloro-N-[2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-6-methylphenyl]acetamide(Terbuchlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-[(3-methoxy-2-thienyl)methyl]acetamide(Thenylchlor), and2-chloro-N-(2,3-dimethylphenyl)-N-(1-methylethyl)acetamide (Xylachlor).

In certain embodiments, a crop plant is selected from cereals, rice,maize, sorghum, sugar cane, cotton, canola, turf, barley, potato, sweetpotato, sunflower, rye, oats, wheat, corn, soybean, sugar beet, tobacco,safflower, tomato, alfalfa, pineapple and cassava.

In one embodiment, a second component is selected fromN-ethyl-N′-(1-methylethyl)-6-(methylthio)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine,N-(3,4-dichlophenyl)-N,N-dimethyl urea,5-cyclopropyl-4-(2-methylsulfonyl-4-trifluoromethylbenzoyl)isoxazole and4-amino-6-tert-butyl-4,5-dihydro-3-methylthio-1,2,4-triazin-5-one. Inone embodiment, a crop plant is selected from the group consisting ofsugar cane, pineapple, cassava, turf and pasture.

In one embodiment, a composition further comprises2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone and/or3-cyclohexyl-6-dimethylamino-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione.In one embodiment, a crop plant is sugar cane, turf and pasture.

In one embodiment, a composition further comprises4-methyl-2-chlorophenoxyacetic acid. In an additional embodiment, acomposition further includes an adjuvant. In a further embodiment, anadjuvant is an ethoxylated propoxylated fatty amine or apolyether-polymethylsiloxane-copolymer. In one embodiment, a crop plantis sugar cane, turf and pasture.

In one embodiment, a first compound is4-amino-5-isopropyl-2-(tert-butyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one.

In one embodiment, a composition is contacted at an application rate offrom 0.01 kg/ha to 5.00 kg/ha of the first compound and from 0.5 kg/hato 10.00 kg/ha of the second component to the crop. In a furtherembodiment, a composition is contacted at an application rate of from0.03 kg/ha to 3.00 kg/ha of the first compound to the crop. In yet afurther embodiment, a composition is contacted at an application rate offrom 0.05 kg/ha to 5.00 kg/ha of the second component to the crop.

As used herein, “application rate” refers to the amount of a synergistictreatment composition applied over an area, that is, “application rate”is nominally an application coverage. “Application rate” is not intendedto encompass an application amount per unit time as might be implied bythe term “rate.”

In one embodiment, a composition is applied as a pre-emergencetreatment. In another embodiment, the composition is applied as apost-emergence treatment.

In certain embodiments, a weed is Amaranthus, Digitaria, Cyperus orEuphorbia.

In some embodiments, a composition comprises a synergistic amount of acombination of amicarbazone(4-amino-N-tert-butyl-4,5-dihydro-3-isopropyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazole-1-carboxamide)and mesotrione(2-[4-(Methylsulfonyl)-2-nitrobenzoyl]cyclohexane-1,3-dione), whereinthe composition is an effective herbicide.

In some embodiments, the composition further comprises an adjuvant. Insome embodiments, the the adjuvant is an ethoxylated propoxylated fattyamine or a polyether-polymethylsiloxane-copolymer.

In some embodiments, the composition further comprises a herbicidallyacceptable diluent or carrier.

In some embodiments, the composition comprises a solid or liquid form.In some embodiments, the composition comprises an emulsifiableconcentrate, wettable powder, granule, dust, oil spray or aerosol.

In some embodiments, the composition provides synergistic control of oneor more weeds. In some embodiments, the one or more weeds is a broadleafweed. In some embodiments, the one or more weeds is selected from thegroup consisting of mustard, Poa annua, green foxtail, crabgrass,blackjack, pigweed, khaki weed, crab-finger grass, large thornapple,purslane, dwarf marigold, field bindweed, anoda weed, Rottboeliaexaltata, Ipomeoea purpurea, Eleusine indica, Amaranthus spinosus, andCommelina benghalensis.

In some embodiments, the mesotrione and amicarbzone are present in aratio within a range of from about 16:1 to about 4:3, such ratios beingweight ratios. In some such embodiments, the ratio of mesotrione andamicarbzone is within a range of from about 8:1 to about 4:3.

In some embodiments, a method for selective control of weeds comprisescontacting a weed with the above described compositions.

In some embodiments, the method is employed to control weeds presentwithin a crop. In some such embodiments, the crop is selected from thegroup consisting of cereals, rice, maize, sorghum, sugar cane, cotton,canola, grass, turf grass, barley, potato, sweet potato, sunflower, rye,oats, wheat, corn, soybean, sugar beet, tobacco, safflower, tomato,alfalfa, pineapple and cassava. In some such embodiments, the weed is abroadleaf weed. In some such embodiments, the weed is selected from thegroup consisting of mustard, Poa annua, green foxtail, crabgrass,blackjack, pigweed, khaki weed, crab-finger grass, large thornapple,purslane, dwarf marigold, field bindweed, anoda weed, Rottboeliaexaltata, Ipomeoea purpurea, Eleusine indica, Amaranthus spinosus, andCommelina benghalensis, and combinations thereof.

In some embodiments, methods apply the composition as a pre-emergencetreatment. In other embodiments, methods apply the composition isapplied as a post-emergence treatment.

In some embodiments, methods apply the composition at an applicationrate of from about 0.035 kg/ha to about 0.210 kg/ha of amicarbazone andfrom about 0.280 kg/ha to about 0.560 kg/ha of mesotrione to the crop.In some such embodiments, the composition is applied at an applicationrate of about 0.210 kg/ha of amicarbazone and about 0.560 kg/ha ofmesotrione to the crop. In other such embodiments, the composition isapplied at an application rate of about 0.210 kg/ha of amicarbazone andabout 0.280 kg/ha of mesotrione to the crop.

In any of the aforementioned composition or methods, the compositionexhibits reduced bleaching of one or more weeds as compared toapplication of mesotrione alone. “Bleaching,” as used herein, refers tothe discoloration of weeds causing it to be visually more conspicuous tothe eye of an observer. This may appear as a lightening of an existingcolor or a washing out of pigmentation observed as a whitening of theweed.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

A series of active compounds from the carbamoyltriazolinone series, usedjointly with herbicidally active compounds from various classes ofsubstances, show a synergistic activity with regard to the actionagainst weeds and can be employed as products for controlling (e.g.limiting growth) monocotyledonous (e.g. glasses) or dicotyledonous weeds(e.g. board leaves) in crops of useful plants such as, for example, inbarley, maize, rice, soya beans, sunflowers, wheat, pineapple, Cassava,sugar cane, corn and Agave. but also for the selective, semi- andnon-selective control of monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous weeds.

Disclosed herein are herbicidal compositions, characterized by aneffective content of composition comprising

(a) a carbamoyltriazolinone of the general formula (I)

wherein:

R₁ represents hydrogen, hydroxyl, amino, or in each case optionallysubstituted alkyl, alkenyl, alkinyl, alkoxy, alkenyloxy, alkinyloxy,alkylamino, alkenylamino, alkenylamino, alkylideneamino, dialkylamino,cycloalkyl, cycloalkylalkyl, aryl and arylalkyl, any of which may beoptionally substituted,

R₂ represents alkyl, alkenyl, alkinyl, alkoxy, alkenyloxy, alkinyloxy,alkylthio, alkenylthio, alkinylthio, alkylamino, alkenylamino,alkinylamino, dialkylamino, cycloalkyl, cycloalkyloxy, cycloalkylalkyl,aryl, aryloxy, arylthio, arylamino and arylalkyl, any of which may beoptionally substituted, and

R₃ represents alkyl, alkenyl, alkinyl, cycloalkyl, cycloalkylalkyl,arylalkyl, arylalkenyl and arylalkinyl, any of which may be optionallysubstituted.

(Active Compounds of Group a)

(b) one or more compounds from a second component of herbicidescontaining the active compounds mentioned herein below:2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone (Clomazone),3-cyclohexyl-6-dimethylamino-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione(Hexazinone), 4-methyl-2-chlorophenoxyacetic acid (MCPA),2-chloro-4-(ethylamine)-6-(isopropylamine)-s-triazine (Atrazine),N-ethyl-N′-(1-methylethyl)-6-(methylthio)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine(Ametryn), N-(3,4-dichlophenyl)-N,N-dimethyl urea (Diuron),5-cyclopropyl-4-(2-methylsulfonyl-4-trifluoromethylbenzoyl)isoxazole(Isoxaflutole),4-amino-6-tert-butyl-4,5-dihydro-3-methylthio-1,2,4-triazin-5-one(Metribuzin), 1-(5-tert-butyl-1,3,4-thiadiazol-2-yl)-1,3-dimethylurea(Tebuthiuron),2′,4′-dichloro-5′-(4-difluoromethyl-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)methanesulfonanilide(Sulfentrazone), 2-(4-mesyl-2-nitrobenzoyl)cyclohexane-1,3-dione(Mesotrione), N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine (Glyphosate), dimethylaminesalt of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D Amine), an herbicide ofthe chloroacetamide class, for example,2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1-methylethoxy)methyl]acetamide(Propisochlor), 2-chloro-N-ethoxymethyl-6′-ethylacet-o-toluidide(Acetochlor),2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide(Metolachlor),2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1S)-2-methoxy-1-methylethyl]acetamide(S-Metolachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(methoxymethyl)acetamide (Alachlor),and N-(butoxymethyl)-2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)acetamide(Butachlor),N-[[(2Z)-2-butenyloxy]methyl]-2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)acetamide(Butenachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-[(2-methylpropoxy)methyl]acetamide(Delachlor), N-(chloroacetyl)-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)glycine(Diethatyl),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxyethyl)acetamide(Dimethachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(1H-pyrazol-1-ylmethyl)acetamide(Metazachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(2-propoxyethyl)acetamide(Pretilachlor), 2-chloro-N-(1-methylethyl)-N-phenylacetamide(Propachlor), 2-chloro-N-(1-methyl-2-propynyl)-N-phenylacetamide(Prynachlor),N-(butoxymethyl)-2-chloro-N-[2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-6-methylphenyl]acetamide(Terbuchlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-[(3-methoxy-2-thienyl)methyl]acetamide(Thenylchlor), and2-chloro-N-(2,3-dimethylphenyl)-N-(1-methylethyl)acetamide (Xylachlor),and mixtures thereof.

(Active Compounds of Group b)

The meanings of the radicals mentioned in the above formula (I) areillustrated hereinbelow.

In certain embodiments, R₁ represents hydrogen, hydroxyl, amino, orrepresents alkyl, alkenyl, alkinyl, alkoxy, alkenyloxy, alkinyloxy,alkylamino, alkenylamino, alkinylamino, alkylideneamino or dialkylamino,each of which has up to 6 carbon atoms and each of which is optionallysubstituted by halogen or cyano, or represents cycloalkyl,cycloalkylalkyl, each of which has 3 to 6 carbon atoms in the cycloalkylgroups and, if appropriate, 1 to 4 carbon atoms in the alkyl group andeach of which is optionally substituted by halogen, cyano orC₁-C₄-alkyl, or repre-sents phenyl or phenyl-C₁-C₄-alkyl, each of whichis optionally substituted by halogen, cyano, C₁-C₄-alkyl orC₁-C₄-alkoxy.

In certain embodiments, R₂ represents alkyl, alkenyl, alkinyl, alkoxy,alkenyloxy, alkinyloxy, alkylthio, alkenylthio, alkinylthio, alkylamino,alkenylamino, alkinylamino or dialkylamino, each of which has up to 6carbon atoms and each of which is optionally substituted by halogen,cyano, C₁-C₄-alkoxy or C₁-C₄-alkylthio, or represents cycloalkyl,cycloalkyloxy or cycloalkylalkyl, each of which has 3 to 6 carbon atomsin the cycloalkyl groups and, if appropriate, 1 to 4 carbon atoms in thealkyl group and each of which is optionally substituted by halogen,cyano or C₁-C₄-alkyl, or represents phenyl, phenoxy, phenylthio,phenylamino or phenyl-C₁-C₄-alkyl, each of which is optionallysubstituted by halogen, cyano, C₁-C₄-alkyl or C₁-C₄-alkoxy.

In certain embodiments, R₃ represents alkyl, alkenyl or alkinyl, each ofwhich has up to 10 carbon atoms and each of which is optionallysubstituted by halogen, cyano, C₁-C₄-alkoxy, C₁-C₄-alkylthio,C₁-C₄-alkylsulphinyl, C₁-C₄-alkylsulphonyl, C₁-C₄-alkylamino ordi-(C₁-C₄-alkyl) amino, or represents cycloalkyl or cycloalkylalkyl,each of which has 3 to 6 carbon atoms in the cycloalkyl moiety and, ifappropriate,) to 4 carbon atoms in the alkyl moiety and each of which isoptionally substituted by halogen, cyano or C₁-C₄-alkyl, or representsphenyl-C₁-C₆-alkyl, phenyl-C₂-C₆-alkenyl or phenyl-C₂-C₆-alkinyl, eachof which is optionally substituted by halogen, cyano, C₁-C₄-alkyl orC₁-C₄-alkoxy.

In certain embodiments, R₁ represents hydrogen, hydroxyl, amino, orrepresents methyl, ethyl, n- or i-propyl, n-, i-, s- or t-butyl,propenyl, butenyl, propinyl or butinyl, methoxy, ethoxy, n- ori-propoxy, n-, i-, s- or t-butoxy, propenyloxy, butenyloxy, propinyloxyor butinyloxy, methylamino, ethylamino, n- or i-propylamino, n-, i-, s-or t-butylamino, propenylamino, butenylamino, propiny-lamino orbutinylamino, ethylideneamino, propylideneamino, butylideneamino,dimethylamino or diethylamino, each of which is optionally substitutedby fluorine, chlorine or cyano, or represents cyclopropyl, cyclobutyl,cyclopentyl, cyclohexyl, cyclopropylmethyl, cyclobutylmethyl,cyclopentylmethyl or cyclohexylmethyl, each of which is optionallysubstituted by fluorine, chlorine, bromine, cyano, methyl, ethyl, n- ori-propyl, or represents phenyl or benzyl, each of which is optionallysubstituted by fluorine, chlorine, bromine, cyano, methyl, ethyl, n- ori-propyl, n-, i-, s- or t-butyl, methoxy or ethoxy.

In certain embodiments, R₂ represents methyl, ethyl, n- or i-propyl, n-,i-, s- or t-butyl, propenyl, butenyl, propinyl, butinyl, methoxy,ethoxy, n- or i-propoxy, n-, i-, s- or t-butoxy, propenyloxy,butenyloxy, propinyloxy, butinyloxy, methylthio, ethylthio, n ori-propylthio, n-, i-, s- or t-butylthio, propenylthio, butenylthio,propinylthio, butinylthio, methylamino, ethylamino, n- or i-propylamino,n-, i-, s- or t-butylamino, propenylamino, butenylamino, propinylamino,butinylamino, dimethy-lamino or diethylamino, each of which isoptionally substituted by fluorine, chlorine, cyano, methoxy, ethoxy, n-or i-propoxy, methylthio, ethylthio, n- or i-propylthio, or representscyclopropyl, cyclobutyl, cyclopentyl, cyclohexyl, cyclopropyloxy,cyclobutyloxy, cyclopentyloxy, cyclohexyloxy, cyclopropylmethyl,cyclobutylmethyl, cyclopentylmethyl or cyclohexylmethyl, each of whichis optionally substituted by fluorine, chlorine, bromine, cyano, methyl,ethyl, n- or i-propyl, or represents phenyl, phenoxy, phenylthio,phe-nylamino or benzyl, each of which is optionally substituted byfluorine, chlorine, bromine, cyano, methyl, ethyl, n- or i-propyl, n-,i-, s- or t-butyl, methoxy or ethoxy.

In certain embodiments, R₃ represents methyl, ethyl, n- or i-propyl, n-,i-, s- or t-butyl, propenyl, butenyl, pentenyl, hexenyl, propinyl,butinyl, pentinyl or hexinyl, each of which is optionally substituted byfluorine, cyano, methoxy, ethoxy, n- or i-propoxy, n-, i-, s- ort-butoxy, methylthio, ethylthio, n- or i-propylthio, n-, i-, s-, ort-butylthio, methylsulphinyl, ethylsulphinyl, methylsulphonyl,ethylsulphonyl, methylamino, ethylamino, n- or i-propylamino, n-, i-, s-or t-butylamino, dimethylamino, diethylamino, dipropylamino ordibutylamino, or represents cyclopropyl, cyclobutyl, cyclopentyl,cyclohexyl, cyclopropylmethyl, cyclobutylmethyl, cyclopentylmethyl,cyclohexylmethyl, cyclohexylethyl or cyclohexylpropyl, each of which isoptionally substituted by fluorine, chlorine, bromine, cyano, methyl,ethyl, n- or i-propyl, or represents benzyl, phenylethyl, phenylpropyl,phenylbutyl, phenylethenyl, phenylpropenyl, phenylbutenyl,phenylethinyl, phenyl-propinyl or phenylbutinyl, each of which isoptionally substituted by fluorine, chlorine, bromine, cyano, methyl,ethyl, n- or i-propyl, n-, i-, s- or t-butyl, methoxy or ethoxy.

In certain embodiments, R₁ represents hydrogen, amino, or representsmethyl, ethyl, n- or i-propyl, propenyl, butenyl, propinyl or butinyl,methoxy, ethoxy, n- or i-propoxy, propenyloxy or propinyloxy, each ofwhich is optionally substituted by fluorine or chlorine, or representsmethylamino, ethylamino, n- or i-propylamino, propeny-lamino orpropinylamino, dimethylamino or diethylamino, or represents cyclopropylor cyclopropylmethyl, each of which is optionally substituted byfluorine, chlorine, cyano or methyl.

In certain embodiments, R₂ represents methyl, ethyl, n- or i-propyl, n-,i-, s- or t-butyl, propenyl, butenyl, propinyl, butinyl, methoxy,ethoxy, n- or i-propoxy, n-, i-, s- or t-butoxy, propenyloxy,butenyloxy, propinyloxy, butinyloxy, methylthio, ethylthio, n- ori-propylthio, n-, i-, s- or t-butylthio, propenylthio, butenylthio,propinylthio, butinylthio, methylamino, ethylamino, n- or i-propylamino,n-, i-, s- or t-butylamino, propenylamino, butenylamino, propinylamino,butinylamino, dimethy-lamino or diethylamino, each of which isoptionally substituted by fluorine, chlorine, cyano, methoxy, ethoxy,methylthio or ethylthio, or represents cyclopropyl, cyclo-propyloxy orcyclopropylmethyl, each of which is option-ally substituted by fluorine,chlorine, cyano or methyl.

In certain embodiments, R₃ represents methyl, ethyl, n- or i-propyl, n-,i-, s- or t-butyl, propenyl, butenyl, pentenyl, hexenyl, propinyl,butinyl, pentinyl or hexinyl, each of which is optionally substituted byfluorine, cyano, methoxy, ethoxy, n- or i-propoxy, methylthio,ethylthio, n- or i-propylthio, methylsulphinyl, ethylsulphinyl,methylsulphonyl, ethylsulphonyl, methylamino, ethylamino, n- ori-propylamino, dimethylamino or diethylamino, or represents cyclopropyl,cyclobutyl, cyclopentyl, cyclohexyl, cyclopropylmethyl,cyclobutylmethyl, cyclopentylmethyl, cyclohexylmethyl, cyclohexylethylor cyclohexylpropyl, each of which is optionally substituted byfluorine, chlorine, bromine, cyano, methyl, ethyl, n- or i-propyl, orrepresents benzyl, phenylethyl, phenylpropyl, phenylbutyl,phenylethenyl, phenylpropenyl, phenylbutenyl, phenylethinyl,phenyl-propinyl or phenylbutinyl, each of which is optionallysubstituted by fluorine, chlorine, bromine, cyano, methyl, ethyl, n- ori-propyl, n-, i-, s- or t-butyl, methoxy or ethoxy.

Non-limiting examples of individually compounds of the formula (I) to beused as components according to the invention in mixtures are:

4-amino-5-methyl-2-(1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-ethyl-2-(1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one, 4-amino-5-n-propyl-2-(1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-1-propyl-2-(1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-methoxy-2-(1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-ethoxy-2-(l,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-methyl-2-(2-fluoro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-ethyl-2-(2-fluoro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-n-propyl-2-(2-fluoro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-1-propyl-2-(2-fluoro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-methoxy-2-(2-fluoro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-ethoxy-2-(2-fluoro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-amino-carbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-methyl-2-(2-chloro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-ethyl-2-(2-chloro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-n-propyl-2-(2-chloro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-1-propyl-2-(2-chloro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-amino-carbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-methoxy-2-(2-chloro-1,1-dimethylethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-ethoxy-2-(2-chloro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-1-propyl-2-1-propyl-aminocarbonyl-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-dimethylamino-2-(1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-dimethylamino-2-(2-fluoro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one,4-amino-5-dimethylamino-2-(2-chloro-1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-oneand4-methyl-5-methoxy-2-(1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one.

The compound4-amino-5-(1-methyl-ethyl)-2-(1,1-dimethyl-ethyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one-in accordance with Chem. Abstracts also to be termed4-amino-N-(1,1-dimethyl-ethyl)-4,5-dihydro-3-(1-methyl-ethyl)-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazole-1-carboxamide(CAS-Reg. No.: 129909-90-6, Compound (I-1) of the use examples, proposedcommon name: “amicarbazone”)- is a component of the formula (I) in themixture.

A family of compositions comprising a first compound and a secondcomponent, wherein said first compound is a compound of the formula (I)

In certain embodiments, R₁ is an optionally substituted amino. Incertain embodiments, R₁ is NH₂. In certain embodiments, R₂ is anoptionally substituted alkyl. In certain embodiments, R₂ is i-propyl. Incertain embodiments, R₃ is an optionally substituted alkyl. In certainembodiments, R₃ is t-butyl. In certain embodiments, the first compoundis4-amino-5-isopropyl-2-(tert-butyl-aminocarbonyl)-2,4-dihydro-3H-1,2,4-triazol-3-one(Amicarbazone).

In certain embodiments, the second component is2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone and3-cyclohexyl-6-dimethylamino-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione.In certain embodiments, the second component is4-methyl-2-chlorophenoxyacetic acid. In certain embodiments, the secondcomponent is one or more ofN-ethyl-N′-(1-methylethyl)-6-(methylthio)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine,N-(3,4-dichlophenyl)-N,N-dimethyl urea,5-cyclopropyl-4-(2-methylsulfonyl-4-trifluoromethylbenzoyl)isoxazole or4-amino-6-tert-butyl-4,5-dihydro-3-methylthio-1,2,4-triazin-5-one.

Examples of a combination composition according to the inventioninclude, but are not limited to:

Amicarbazone+clomazone+hexazinone; amicarbazone+MCPA+ethoxylatedpropoxylated fatty amines;amicarbazone+MCPA+polyether-polymethylsiloxane-copolymers;amicarbazone+ametryn+amtrazine; amicarbazone+diuron;amicarbazone+isoxaflutole; amicarbazone+metribuzin;amicarbazone+hexazinone; amicarbazone+hexazinone+diuron; andamicarbazone+ametrine+diuron; amicarbazone+tebuthiuron; andamicarbazone+propisochlor, amicarbazone+acetochlor,amicarbazone+metolachlor, amicarbazone+S-Metolachlor,amicarbazone+alachlor, amicarbazone+butachlor, amicarbazone+butenachlor,amicarbazone+delachlor, amicarbazone+diethatyl,amicarbazone+dimethachlor, amicarbazone+metazachlor,amicarbazone+pretilachlor, amicarbazone+propachlor,amicarbazone+prynachlor, amicarbazone+terbuchlor,amicarbazone+thenylchlor, and amicarbazone+xylachlor.

Optionally, a composition can include an adjuvant. An adjuvant may beused with the composition to enhance or improve herbicidal performance.Adjuvants may be added to the composition at the time of formulation, orby the applicator to the spray mix just prior to treatment. Adjuvantsinclude surfactants, compatability agents, anti-foaming agents and spraycolorants (dyes), and drift control agents. In certain embodiments, theadjuvant is an ethoxylated propoxylated fatty amine or apolyether-polymethylsiloxane-copolymer.

As disclosed herein, the compound combinations, in addition to beingwell tolerated by crops, have herbicidal activities and can be used in avariety of crops for selectively controlling weed. Non-limiting examplesof crops include maize, wheat, sugar cane, barley, rice, citrus, palmtrees, pineapple, cucurbits, beans, soybeans, agave, cassava, turf andpasture.

The compound combinations can also be used for controlling undesiredvegetation in non-crop areas, e.g. fallow agricultural land. The term“non-crop area” used herein refers to areas where a crop, or anyintentionally planted vegetation, is not grown. The term “fallowagricultural land” used herein refers to a piece of land where no cropor pasture is growing. A fallow agricultural land that is not used forcrops, may be left unused in order to restore its natural fertility.

In various embodiments, the herbicidal activity of a compositionaccording to the invention exceeds the total of the activities of theindividual active compounds. If there are two active compounds, theactivity will be greater than the same of the single active compoundalone. Thus, in various embodiments, herbicidal compositions includecompositions synergistic for control of one or more weeds.

The compositions of the invention have been found to be activeherbicides in possessing herbicidal activity against one or more speciesof weeds. In the broadest sense, the term “weed” refers to plants whichgrow in locations in which they are not desired. In other words, a weedis a plant in which in the context of a crop is undesirable due tocompetition for water, nutrients, sunlight, soil, etc.

As used herein the term “herbicide” refers to a compound which adverselycontrol, or modifies (e.g. limits or reduces) the growth of plants,particularly of undesirable plants. A “herbicidally effective amount” ismeant an amount of compound which causes an adverse effect on the growthof plants, such as weeds. The herbicide can affect pre- or post-emergentgrowth or both.

The term “plants” is meant to include germinant seeds, emergingseedlings, and established vegetation, including roots and above-groundportions (for example, leaves, stalks, flowers, fruits, etc.) Suchadverse modifying and controlling effects may include all deviationsfrom natural plant development, including killing the weed.

The compositions of the invention can be used, for example, in controlof one or more of following plants (weeds):

Monocotyledonous weeds include the genera: Aegilops, Agropyron,Agrostis, Alopecurus, Apera, Avena, Brachiaria, Bromus, Cenchrus,Commelina, Cynodon, Cyperus, Dactyloctenium, Digitaria, Echinochloa,Eleocharis, Eleusine, Eragrostis, Eriochloa, Festuca, Fimbristylis,Heteranthera, Imperata, Ischaemum, Leptochloa, Lolium, Monochoria,Panicum, Paspalum, Phalaris, Phleum, Poa, Rottboellia, Sagittaria,Scirpus, Setaria, Sorghum.

Dicotyledonous weeds include the genera: Abutilon, Amaranthus, Ambrosia,Anoda, Anthemis, Aphanes, Atriplex, Bellis, Bidens, Capsella, Carduus,Cassia, Centaurea, Chenopodium, Cirsium, Convolvulus, Croton, Datura,Desmodium, Emex, Erysimum, Euphorbia, Galeopsis, Galinsoga, Galium,Hibiscus, Ipomoea, Kochia, Lamium, Lepidium, Lindernia, Matricaria,Mentha, Mercurialis, Merremia, Momordica, Mullugo, Myosotis, Papaver,Pharbitis, Plantago, Polygonum, Portulaca, Ranunculus, Raphanus,Ricinus, Rorippa, Rotala, Rumex, Salsola, Senecio, Sesbania, Sida,Sinapis, Solanum, Sonchus, Sphenoclea, Stellaria, Stizolobium,Taraxacum, Thlaspi, Trifolium, Urtica, Veronica, Viola, Xanthium.

The use of the active compound combinations according to the inventionis in no way restricted to these genera, but also extends in the samemanner to other plants.

Depending on the concentration, the herbicidal compositions are suitablefor selective weed control in crops, for example, cereals, rice, maize,sorghum, sugar cane, cotton, canola, soya, turf, barley, potato, sweetpotato, sunflower, rye, oats, wheat, corn, soybean, sugar beet,safflower, alfalfa, cassava, cucurbits, pineapple and pastures.

Specific weed species encountered in corn include, but not limited to,Ixophorus unisetus, Amaranthus hybridu, Ipomoea purpurea, and Sicyosangulata.

Specific weed species encountered in sugar cane include, but not limitedto, Acalypha sp., Boerhavia erecta, Trianthema portulacastrum,Amaranthus hybridus, and Amaranthus lividus.

In particular embodiments, a synergistic effect of the compoundcombinations according to the invention is present. As used herein, theterm “synergism” means that the herbicidal action of the active compoundcombination exceeds the action of the active compounds when appliedindividually on a given weed, either pre- or post-emergent.

The ratios by weight of an active compound (e.g. group a and group b) inthe active compound combinations can be varied within relatively wideranges. In general, 0.001 to 1000 parts by weight, 0.02 to 500 parts byweight, 0.05 to 100 by weight, 0.01 to 100 parts by weight, or 0.1 to 10parts by weight of one or more active compound(s) of the secondcomponent (group b) are used per part by weight of the first compound(group a).

In the treatment of crops, in general, the application rate is from 0.01kg/ha to 5.00 kg/ha or from 0.03 kg/ha to 3.00 kg/ha of the firstcompound, and from 0.5 kg/ha to 10.00 kg/ha or from 0.05 kg/ha to 5.00kg/ha of the second component.

The herbicidal compositions can be in customary formulations, such assolutions, emulsions, wettable powders, suspensions, powders, dusts,pastes, soluble powders, granules, suspo-emulsion concentrates,emulsifiable concentrate, oil spray, aerosol, natural and syntheticmaterials impregnated with active compound, and very fine capsules inpolymeric substances. In certain embodiments, the compositions is in aform of an emulsifiable concentrate, wettable powder, granule, dust, oilspray or aerosol.

These formulations can be produced, for example by mixing the activecompounds with extenders, that is liquid solvents and/or solid carriers,optionally with the use of surface-active agents, such as emulsifyingagents and/or dispersing agents and/or foam-forming agents.

In the case of the use of water as an extender, organic solvents can,for example, also be used as auxiliary solvents. Liquid solvents includearomatics, such as xylene, toluene or alkylnaphthalenes, chlorinatedaromatics and chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons, such aschlorobenzenes, chloroethylenes or methylene chloride, ali-phatichydrocarbons, such as cyclohexane or paraffins, for example petroleumfractions, mineral and vegetable oils, alcohols, such as butanol orglycol as well as their ethers and esters, ketones, such as acetone,methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone or cyclohexanone, stronglypolar solvents, such as dimethylformamide and dimethyl sulphoxide, aswell as water.

As solid carriers there are suitable, for example, ammonium salts andground natural minerals, such as kaolins, clays, talc, chalk, quartz,attapulgite, mont-morillonite or diatomaceous earth, and groundsynthetic minerals, such as finely divided silica, alumina andsilicates, as solid carriers for granules there are suitable: forexample crushed and fractionated natural rocks such as calcite, marble,pumice, sepiolite and dolomite, as well as synthetic granules ofinorganic and organic meals, and granules of organic material such assawdust, coconut shells, maize cobs and tobacco stalks; as emulsifyingand/or foam-forming agents there are suitable: for example nonionic andanionic emulsifiers, such as polyoxyethylene fatty acid esters,poly-oxyethylene fatty alcohol ethers, for example alkylaryl polyglycolethers, alkylsulphonates, alkyl sulphates, aryl-sulphonates as well asprotein hydrolysates; as dispersing agents there are suitable: forexample lignin-sulphite waste liquors and methylcellulose.

Adhesives such as carboxymethylcellulose and natural and syntheticpolymers in the form of powders, granules or latexes, such as gumarabic, polyvinyl alcohol and polyvinyl acetate, as well as naturalphospholipids, such as cephalins and lecithins, and syntheticphospholipids, can be used in the formulations. Further additives may bemineral and vegetable oils.

Colourants can also included in the formulations. Non-limiting examplesare inorganic pigments, such as iron oxide, titanium oxide and PrussianBlue, and organic dyestuffs, such as alizarin dyestuffs, azo dye-stuffsand metal phthalocyanine dyestuffs, and trace nutrients such as salts ofiron, manganese, boron, copper, cobalt, molybdenum and zinc.

The formulations in general comprise between 0.1 and 95 percent byweight, or between 0.5 and 90 percent by weight, of each of the activecompounds from group a (or the first compound) and group b (or thesecond component).

Herbicidal compositions according to the invention can be applied in theform of ready mixes. Herbicidal compositions can also be formulatedindividually and mixed upon use, i.e. applied in the form of tank mixes.

Herbicidal compositions can be used as such or in the form of theirformulations, and furthermore also as mixtures with other knownherbicides, ready mixes or tank mixes. They may also be mixed with otherknown active compounds, such as fungicides, insecticides, acaricides,nematicides, bird repellents, growth substances, plant nutrients andagents which improve soil structure. For particular applicationpurposes, in particular when applied post-emergence, formulations suchas mineral or vegetable oils which are tolerated by plants (for examplethe commercial product “Oleo DuPont 11E”) or ammonium salts such as, forexample, ammonium sulphate or ammonium thiocyanate, as further additivescan be included.

Herbicidal compositions can be used as such, in the form of theirformulations or in the forms prepared therefrom by dilution of aconcentrated form, such as ready-to-use or concentrated solutions,suspensions, emulsions, powders, pastes and granules. They are used inthe customary manner, for example by watering, spraying, atomizing,dusting or scattering.

Herbicidal compositions according to the invention can be applied beforeand after the plants have emerged, that is to say pre-emergence andpost-emergence. They can also be incorporated into the soil before,during or after sowing seeds of a crop.

The invention also provides methods for controlling undesirable plantsor vegetation. In one embodiment, a method includes applying to a cropwhere control of such vegetation is desired, an herbicidally effectiveamount of a composition. Such methods include a composition of theinvention, optionally together with an adjuvant, an inert diluent or acarrier suitable for use with an herbicide.

The invention also provides methods for selective control of weeds. Inone embodiment, a method includes contacting a composition of theinvention onto a crop plant in need of weed control or at risk ofundesirable weeds, in an amount effective to provide weed control in thecrop.

Herbicidal activity of the compound combinations can be seen from theexamples which follow. While the individual active compounds show lessactivity with regard to herbicidal activity, certain combinations have aherbicidal activity which exceeds a simple sum of the activity of theindividual active compounds.

Activity for a given combination of two active compounds can becalculated as follows (cf. COLBY. S. R.: “Calculating synergistic andantagonistic responses of herbicide combinations”. Weeds 15, Pages20-22. 1967):

If:

X=% damage by herbicide A (active compound of group a) at an applicationrate of p kg/ha,

Y=% damage by herbicide B (active compound of group b) at an applicationrate of q kg/ha,

E=the expected % damage of herbicides A+B at an application rate of p+qkg/ha, then

E=X+Y−(X*Y/100).

Similarly, according to Colby, the activity for a given combination ofthree active compounds can be calculated as follows (cf. COLBY. S. R.:“Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicidecombinations”. Weeds 15, Pages 20-22. 1967):

If:

X=% damage by herbicide A (active compound of group a) at an applicationrate of p kg/ha,

Y=% damage by herbicide B1 (a first active compound of group b) at anapplication rate of q kg/ha,

Y=% damage by herbicide B2 (a second active compound of group b) at anapplication rate of r kg/ha,

E=the expected % damage of herbicides A+B1+B2 at an application rate ofp+q+r kg/ha,

then

E=X+Y+Z−(X*Y+X*Z+Y*Z)/100)+X*Y*Z/10,000.

If the actual damage exceeds the calculated value (E), the combinationis considered to have synergistic effect activity.

It can be seen from the use examples herein below that the foundherbicidal action of the active compound combinations according to theinvention exceeds the calculated value, that is to say that the newactive compound combinations have a synergistic effect.

Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used hereinhave the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill inthe art to which this invention belongs. Although methods and materialssimilar or equivalent to those described herein can be used in thepractice or testing of the invention, suitable methods and materials aredescribed herein.

All applications, publications, patents and other references, citationscited herein are incorporated by reference in their entirety. In case ofconflict, the specification, including definitions, will control.

As used herein, the singular forms “a”, “and,” and “the” include pluralreferents unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

As used herein, all numerical values or numerical ranges includeintegers within such ranges and fractions of the values or the integerswithin ranges unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. Thus, forexample, reference to a range of 90-100%, includes 91%, 92%, 93%, 94%,95%, 95%, 97%, etc., as well as 91.1%, 91.2%, 91.3%, 91.4%, 91.5%, etc.,92.1%, 92.2%, 92.3%, 92.4%, 92.5%, etc., and so forth.

The invention is generally disclosed herein using affirmative languageto describe the numerous embodiments. The invention also specificallyincludes embodiments in which particular subject matter is excluded, infull or in part, such as substances or materials, method steps andconditions, protocols, procedures, assays or analysis. Thus, even thoughthe invention is generally not expressed herein in terms of what theinvention does not include aspects that are not expressly included inthe invention are nevertheless disclosed herein.

A number of embodiments of the invention have been described.Nevertheless, it will be understood that various modifications may bemade without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.Accordingly, the following examples are intended to illustrate but notlimit the scope of invention described in the claims.

EXAMPLES Herbicidal Activity Studies Example 1

Evaluation of Synergistic Action Between Amicarbazone and Propisochloron Digitaria ciliaris.

The herbicide study was conducted at Aburahi Agricultural Research TrialGrass house in Shiga Prefecture, Japan. Various mixtures of DINAMIC®(Amicarbazone 70 DF) and Proponit (Propisochlor 720 EC) was appliedpre-emergence using foliar application by manual sprayer in this study.The mixture was diluted in water immediately prior to application, andapplied at the concentration in Table 1-1. The application rate was 1000L water/ha. Digitaria ciliaris was grown in square plastic pots (10cm×10 cm) and replicated three times.

The herbicidal effect was observed by comparing the extent of Digitariaciliaris treated with the compounds against that occurring in similarnon-treated control. Herbicidal effect was visually assessed andrecorded at 5, 8, 14, 21 and 28 days after treatment (DAT). Damage bythe herbicidal compositions was evaluated with reference to a scale of0% to 100% in comparison with untreated control. 0% means no damage and100% means complete destruction of the plants.

The herbicide effect of amicarbazone, in particular, at 50 g/ha and 100g/ha, was small on Disitaria ciliaris at the one-leaf stage. Similarly,the herbicide effect of propisochlor was less apparent on Disitariaciliaris at the one-leaf stage, for example, the weeding effect indexwas less than 50% at 5 DAT observation at all tested dose rate.Surprisingly, treatments with the herbicidal mixtures significantlyincrease the % damage on the weed. Assessment of the synergistic effectwas evaluated using the Colby method. The herbicidal mixtures(amicarbazone+propisochlor) exert a greater herbicidal action thanexpected according to Colby on the basis of the observed effects of theindividual components when used alone. Therefore, a synergistic effectbetween amicarbazone and propisochlor was confirmed on Disitariaciliaris.

TABLE 1-1 Pre-emergence treatment effects on Digitaria ciliaris (oneleaf-stage of weeds) with various mixtures of amicarbazone andpropisochlor, expressed as percentage control Propisochlor (Rate/ha) DAT0 g 50 g 100 g 200 g Amicarbazone  0 g 5 0 28 42 44 (Rate/ha) 8 0 70 7880 14 0 76 86 90 21 0 88 94 98 28 0 82 92 98  50 g 5 24 70 68 84 (45.3)(55.9) (57.4) 8 38 78 84 86 (81.4) (86.4) (87.6) 14 34 88 94 94 (84.2)(90.8) (93.4) 21 34 94 98 98 (92.1) (96.0) (98.7) 28 26 96 100 100(86.7) (94.1) (98.5) 100 g 5 70 94 94 96 (78.4) (82.6 (83.2) 8 78 98 9898 (93.4) (95.2) (95.6) 14 82 98 100 100 (95.7) (97.5) (98.2) 21 74 100100 100 (96.9) (98.4) (99.5) 28 66 100 100 100 (93.9) (97.3) (99.3) 200g 5 92 100 100 100 (94.2) (95.4) (95.5) 8 96 100 100 100 (98.8) (99.1)(99.2) 14 98 100 100 100 (99.5) (99.7) (99.8) 21 86 100 100 100 (98.3)(99.2) (99.7) 28 86 100 100 100 (97.5) (98.9) (99.7) ( ) indicates thecalculated expected percent damage according to Colby method E, whereinE = a + b (100 − a)/100 A: Herbicidal effect of Propisochlor as singleapplication B: Herbicidal effect of Amicarbazone as single applicationHerbicidal effect index: 0 (No efficacy)-100 (Complete kill)

Example 2

Evaluation of Synergistic Action Between Amicarbazone andClomazone/Hexazinone on Cyperus esculentus.

DINAMIC® (amicarbazone) and Discover (clomazone 400 g/kg+hexazinone 100g/kg) alone or in combination were applied pre-emergence in this study.The formulations for DINAMIC® and Discover were 700 g active ingredienta.i./kg and 500 g active ingredient a.i./kg respectively.

The herbicidal effect was observed by comparing the extent of Cyperusesculentus treated with the compounds against that occurring in similarnon-treated control. Herbicidal effect was visually assessed andrecorded at 27, 43, 46, 60, 63, 77, 83, 97 and 124 days after treatment(DAT). Damage by the herbicidal compositions was evaluated withreference to a scale of 0% to 100% in comparison with untreated control.0% means no damage and 100% means complete destruction of the plants.

The results in Table 2 indicate synergistic effects between amicarbazoneand the clomazone/hexazinone partner. Assessment of the synergisticeffect was evaluated using the Colby method. The theoretical herbicidaleffect index were calculated based on Colby and the values wereindicated in bracket ( ) in Table 2-1. The herbicidal mixtures(amicarbazone+(clomazone/hexazinone)) exert a greater herbicidal actionthan expected according to Colby on the basis of the observed effects ofthe individual components when used alone. In both Trials 1 and 2, theobserved herbicidal effects are greater than the theoretical herbicidaleffects at DAT 77 and DAT 124 respectively, therefore, there existsynergistic effects between amicarbazone and the clomazone/hexazinonepartner on Cyperus esculentus. The underlined values in the tableindicate that the observed weed killing is greater than calculated fromthe Colby formula and therefore indicates a synergistic weed killingeffect or activity.

TABLE 2-1 Pre-emergence treatment effects on Cyperus esculentus,expressed as percentage control Application Days After Treatment (DAT)Active Ingredient(s) Rate (kg/ha) 27 43 46 60 63 77 83 97 124 Trial 1Amicarbazone 1.5 40 62 65 Clomazone/Hexazinone 2.0 0 0  0 Amicarbazone +1.5 + 2.0 83 94 96 (Clomazone/Hexazinone) (65) Trial 2 Amicarbazone 1.537 53 57 68 53 23 Clomazone/Hexazinone 2.0 45 40 17 17  5  0Amicarbazone + 1.5 + 2.0 22 86 82 84 85 77 (Clomazone/Hexazinone) (23) () indicates the calculated expected percent damage according to Colbymethod E, wherein E = a + b (100 − a)/100 A: Herbicidal effect ofClomazone/Hexazinone as single application B: Herbicidal effect ofAmicarbazone as single application Herbicidal effect index: 0 (Noefficacy)-100 (Complete kill)

Example 3

Evaluation of Synergistic Action Between Amicarbazone and OtherHerbicides on Cyperus rotundus.

DINAMIC® (amicarbazone) in combination of various herbicides listed inTable 3-1 were tested for herbicidal activity.

TABLE 3-1 Herbicides used in combination of amicarbazone Name ActiveIngredients Source Volcano-blend Ethoxylated propoxylated VolcanoAgroscience (adjuvant) fatty amines 1000 g/L Break ThruPolyether-polymethylsiloxane- Goldschmidt Chemical (adjuvant) copolymer100% Corporation MCPA 4-Methyl-2- Volcano Agrosciencechlorophenoxyacetic acid

The herbicidal effect was observed by comparing the extent of Cyperusesculentus treated with the compounds against that occurring in similarnon-treated control. Herbicidal effect was visually assessed andrecorded at 4, 8, 18 and 34 days after treatment (DAT). Damage by theherbicidal compositions was evaluated with reference to a scale of 0% to100% in comparison with untreated control. 0% means no damage and 100%means complete destruction of the plants.

Table 3-2 provides post-emergence treatment effects on Cyperusesculentus between amicarbazone and 4-methyl-2-chlorophenoxyacetic acidwith an adjuvant.

TABLE 3-2 Post-emergence treatment effects on Cyperus esculentus,expressed as percentage (by volume) control Application Days After Rate(kg/ha Treatment (DAT) Active Ingredient(s) or L/ha) 4 8 18 34Amicarbazone + Volcano- 1.0 + 0.2% 0 5 0 0 Blend (adjuvant)Amicarbazone + MCPA + 1.0 + 3.5 + 0.2% 0 50 70 0 Volcano-Blend(adjuvant) Amicarbazone + Break Thru 1.0 + 0.1% 0 5 0 0 (adjuvant)Amicarbazone + MCPA + 1.0 + 3.5 + 0.1% 0 50 75 50 Break Thru (adjuvant)

Example 4

Evaluation of Synergistic Action Between Amicarbazone and OtherHerbicides on Cyperus rotundus.

DINAMIC® (amicarbazone) in combination of various herbicides listed inTable 4-1 were tested for herbicidal activity.

TABLE 4-1 Herbicides used in combination of amicarbazone Name ActiveIngredients Source Gesapax Ametryn: N-ethyl-N′-(1-methylethyl)- Syngenta6-(methylthio)-1,3,5-triazine- 2,4-diamine, 500 g/L Karmex Diuron:N-(3,4-dichlophenyl)-N,N- Goldschmidt Chemical dimethyl urea, 800 g/kgCorporation DuPont (in Brazil) Provence Isoxaflutole: 5-cyclopropy1-4-Bayer Group isoxazoly1)[2-(methylsulfonyl)-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]methanone, 750 g/kg Sencor Metribuzin:4-amino-6-(1,1- Bayer Group dimethylethyl)-3-(methylthio)-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-one, 480 g/kg

The herbicidal effect was observed by comparing the extent of Euphorbiaheterophylla (EPHHL) treated with the compounds against that occurringin similar non-treated control. Herbicidal effect was visually assessedand recorded at 14, 23, 36, 49, 65 and 77 days after treatment (DAT).Damage by the herbicidal compositions was evaluated with reference to ascale of 0% to 100% in comparison with untreated control. 0% means nodamage and 100% means complete destruction of the plants.

The results in Table 4-2 indicate synergistic effects in the herbicidaltreatments with (Amicarbazone+Karmex) mixtures and (Amicarbazone+Sencor)mixtures on Euphorbia heterophylla. Assessment of the synergistic effectwas evaluated using the Colby method. The theoretical herbicidal effectindex were calculated based on Colby and the values were indicated inbracket ( ) in Table 4-2. Both of the herbicidal mixtures(amicarbazone+Karmex) and (amicarbazone+Sencor) exert a greaterherbicidal action than expected according to Colby on the basis of theobserved effects of the individual components when used alone. Theobserved herbicidal effects are greater than the theoretical herbicidaleffects at DAT 49, 65 and 77, therefore, there exist synergisticeffects. On the other hand, antagonic effects were observed in theherbicidal treatments with (Amicarbazone+Gesapax) mixtures and(Amicarbazone+Provence) mixtures on Euphorbia heterophylla, as theobserved herbicidal effects were smaller than the theoretical herbicidaleffects at any of the DAT tested (i.e. DAT=14, 23, 36, 49, 65 and 77).The underlined values in the table indicate that the observed weedkilling is greater than calculated from the Colby formula and thereforeindicates a synergistic weed killing effect or activity.

TABLE 4-2 Pre-emergence treatment effects on Euphorbia heterophylla,expressed as percentage control Appli- cation Rate Active (kg/ha DaysAfter Treatment (DAT) Ingredient(s) or L/ha) 14 23 36 49 65 77Amicarbazone 1.50 98 98 96 96 96 90 Amicarbazone 1.00 96 96 96 79 79 75Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 96 96 96 86 86 85 Gesapax 3.00 (100) (99) (99)(89) (88) (86) Gesapax 3.00 96 84 80 47 45 45 Gesapax 5.00 96 72 66 5047 47 Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 96 94 96 90 90 90 Karmex 3.00 (100) (98)(98) (86) (84) (81) Karmex 3.00 96 60 60 35 23 23 Karmex 5.00 98 80 8050 50 35 Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 96 96 96 82 80 82 Provence 0.15 (100)(98) (98) (84) (88) (85) Provence 0.15 90 60 60 45 42 40 Provence 0.2096 82 80 80 66 65 Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 96 96 96 96 90 90 Sencor 2.00(100) (99) (99) (88) (85) (85) Sencor 2.00 96 85 75 41 40 40 Sencor 3.5096 85 85 56 50 50 ( ) indicates the calculated expected percent damageaccording to Colby method E, wherein E = a + b (100 − a)/100 A:Herbicidal effect of the second active ingredients (i.e. Gesapax,Karmex, Provence or Sencor) as single application B: Herbicidal effectof Amicarbazone as single application Herbicidal effect index: 0 (Noefficacy)-100 (Complete kill)

The herbicidal effect was observed by comparing the extent of Ipomoeagradifolia (IAOGR) treated with the compounds against that occurring insimilar non-treated control. Herbicidal effect was visually assessed andrecorded at 14, 23, 36, 49, 65 and 77 days after treatment (DAT). Damageby the herbicidal compositions was evaluated with reference to a scaleof 0% to 100% in comparison with untreated control. 0% means no damageand 100% means complete destruction of the plants. The results of theobserved herbicidal effect and the theoretical herbicidal effected wereshown in Table 4-3. Assessment of the synergistic effect was evaluatedusing the Colby method. The theoretical herbicidal effect index werecalculated based on Colby and the values were indicated in bracket ( ).Most of the observed herbicidal effects were smaller than thetheoretical herbicidal effects in most of the tested results, whichindicate antagonic effects. Some of the observed herbicidal effects werethe same as the theoretical hervicidal effects, which indicate additiveeffects. The underlined values in the table indicate that the observedweed killing is greater than calculated from the Colby formula andtherefore indicates a synergistic weed killing effect or activity.

TABLE 4-3 Pre-emergence treatment effects on Ipomoea gradifolia,expressed as percentage control Appli- cation Rate Active (kg/ha DaysAfter Treatment (DAT) Ingredient(s) or L/ha) 14 23 36 49 65 77Amicarbazone 1.50 98 98 98 98 96 97 Amicarbazone 1.00 100  98 96 96 9393 Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 100 98 96 96 98 96 Gesapax 3.00 (100) (100)(99) (98) (96) (96) Gesapax 3.00 99 87 85 60 47 45 Gesapax 5.00 100  9696 60 60 58 Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 99 96 96 97 94 96 Karmex 3.00 (100)(100) (100) (100) (98) (98) Karmex 3.00 99 97 96 77 70 70 Karmex 5.00 9896 96 79 70 60 Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 100 96 96 98 93 96 Provence 0.15(100) (99) (98) (98) (96) (96) Provence 0.15 90 67 60 47 45 45 Provence0.20 96 94 90 90 64 64 Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 100 96 96 96 96 96 Sencor2.00 (100) (100) (100) (100) (99) (98) Sencor 2.00 100  96 96 96 84 70Sencor 3.50 100  96 96 96 80 67 ( ) indicates the calculated expectedpercent damage according to Colby method E, wherein E = a + b (100 −a)/100 A: Herbicidal effect of the second active ingredients (i.e.Gesapax, Karmex, Provence or Sencor) as single application B: Herbicidaleffect of Amicarbazone as single application Herbicidal effect index: 0(No efficacy)-100 (Complete kill)

The herbicidal effect was observed by comparing the extent of Crotonglandulosus (CROTON) treated with the compounds against that occurringin similar non-treated control. Herbicidal effect was visually assessedand recorded at 14, 23, 36, 49, 65 and 77 days after treatment (DAT).Damage by the herbicidal compositions was evaluated with reference to ascale of 0% to 100% in comparison with untreated control. 0% means nodamage and 100% means complete destruction of the plants. The results ofthe observed herbicidal effect and the theoretical herbicidal effectedwere shown in Table 4-4. Assessment of the synergistic effect wasevaluated using the Colby method. The theoretical herbicidal effectindex were calculated based on Colby and the values were indicated inbracket ( ). Some of the observed herbicidal effects were the same asthe theoretical hervicidal effects, which indicate additive effects. Theunderlined values in the table indicate that the observed weed killingis greater than calculated from the Colby formula and thereforeindicates a synergistic weed killing effect or activity.

TABLE 4-4 Pre-emergence treatment effects on Croton glandulosus,expressed as percentage control Appli- cation Rate (kg/ha Days AfterTreatment (DAT) Active Ingredient(s) or L/ha) 14 23 36 49 65 77Amicarbazone 1.50 100 99 99 99 99 99 Amicarbazone 1.00 100 99 99 95 9999 Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 100 99 99 99 99 99 Gesapax 3.00 (100) (99) (99)(97) (99) (99) Gesapax 3.00 96 60 60 40 40 40 Gesapax 5.00 100 84 80 6262 62 Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 100 99 99 99 99 99 Karmex 3.00 (100) (99)(99) (99) (99) (99) Karmex 3.00 100 92 90 87 87 80 Karmex 5.00 100 92 9288 88 75 Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 100 99 99 99 93 90 Provence 0.15 (100)(99) (99) (97) (99) (99) Provence 0.15 100 65 65 42 42 40 Provence 0.2099 90 90 60 60 60 Amicarbazone + 1.00 + 100 99 99 99 99 99 Sencor 2.00(100) (99) (99) (99) (99) (99) Sencor 2.00 100 96 96 98 99 98 Sencor3.50 100 96 96 96 96 96 ( ) indicates the calculated expected percentdamage according to Colby method E, wherein E = a + b (100 − a)/100 A:Herbicidal effect of the second active ingredients (i.e. Gesapax,Karmex, Provence or Sencor) as single application B: Herbicidal effectof Amicarbazone as single application Herbicidal effect index: 0 (Noefficacy)-100 (Complete kill)

Example 5

Evaluation of Synergistic Action Between Amicarbazone and Mesotrione onMustard (Sinapsis Sp.), Poa annua, Green Foxtail, and Crabgrass sp.

The experiments in this Example were designed to determine whetheramicarbazone could decrease mesotrione-induced bleaching of Kentuckybluegrass, St. Augustine grass, tall fescue and selected turf weedspecies and whether the combination of amicarbazone and mesotrione couldincrease the speed and degree of kill of common turf weeds. Theexperiments in this Example were also designed to determine ifamicarbazone plus mesotrione tank-mixes enhance weed control overtreatments with mesotrione or amicarbazone alone. This Example shows thesynergistic effect of the combination of amicarbazone and mesotrione oninjury and bleaching effects on Mustard (Sinapsis sp.), Poa annua, GreenFoxtail, and Crabgrass sp. The combination of amicarbazone andmesotrione in a tank mixture decreased the objectionable bleachingassociated with mesotrione, increased the speed of complete kill ofweeds and enhanced weed control. The results disclosed in this Examplewere achieved without the aid of non-ionic surfactants.

Field Preparation/Maintenance

Containers were watered as needed based on species and water usage. Thegreenhouse was heated to keep temperatures above 50° F. (10° C.) andventilated as needed to keep temperatures below 100° F. (38° C.).Typical daytime temperatures in the greenhouse were 80-90° F. (27-32°C.) and nighttime temperatures were between 50-60° F. (10-16° C.). Thesoil employed was Promix BX potting soil. Overall moisture conditionswere normal and the closest weather station was on-site. Conditions andequipment employed in this Example are tabulated below in Tables 5-1 and5-2.

TABLE 5-1 Application Description A Time of Day: 12-3 pm ApplicationMethod: SPRAY Application Timing: POSPOS Air Temperature, Unit: 69.4 %Relative Humidity: 71

TABLE 5-2 Application Equipment A Appl. Equipment: CO2 sprayer OperatingPressure, Unit: 30 PSI Nozzle Type: EV Nozzle Size: 8003 Nozzle Spacing,Unit: 24 IN Nozzles/Row: 2

All containers were moved outdoors from the greenhouse and arranged inblocks by treatment for the herbicide applications. A single sprayapplication was applied to each block containing four repetitions ofeach species for each treatment. Plants were then immediately returnedto the greenhouse and irrigated with approximately ¼″ water 1-3 hrsafter treatment with a hose end sprayer. Only the Poa plants weretrimmed with scissors two days prior to treatment at a height ofapproximately 3 inches.

Transplanted tillering Kentucky Bluegrass was 5 to 6 months old,transplanted Poa annua was 5 to 6 months old. Tall fescue was seededinto the crabgrass pots. St. Augustine plants (Floratam and Saphire)were shipped from Port St. Lucie, Fla. Only two replicates of SaphireSt. Augustine grass were used due to plant availability.

Both seedling and tillering stages of Kentucky bluegrass were examined.There were no treatment effects with regard to bleaching becausevirtually no bleaching occurred on any of the Kentucky bluegrass plants.Since Kentucky bluegrass is tolerant to both amicarbazone andmesotrione, no treatment effects were observed indicating thatamicarbazone or mesotrione applied alone or in tank mixture are safe toKentucky Bluegrass. No treatment effects were evident on the tilleringbluegrass at any rating period. However, amicarbazone at the 3 oz/Acrerate and the combination of the two products using the 3 oz/acre rate ofamicarbazone injured Kentucky Bluegrass seedlings, resulting indecreased stand density at 31 days after application for treatments. Ithas been observed that a 3 oz/acre rate of amicarbazone is injurious toseedling Kentucky Bluegrass.

Referring to FIGS. 2A-B, 3A-C, 4A-C, and 5A-D, all ratings of injury orbleaching are based on a scale from 1 to 9. In bleaching measurements, 1indicates no bleaching while 9 indicates that the entire plant is white.Any bleaching measurement 4 and above was considered unacceptable fordesirable turf species. In injury measurements, 1 indicates no injurywhile 9 indicates a dead plant. Any injury measurement 4 and above wasconsidered unacceptable for desirable turf species). Density correlateswith percent cover where 1 indicates no grass while 9 indicates a fullpot.

In general, as evidenced in FIGS. 2A-B, 3A-C, 4A-C, and 5A-D,combinations of amicarbazone with mesotrione resulted in greaterefficacy and less bleaching of weeds. Mustard (FIGS. 2A-B), greenfoxtail (FIGS. 4A-C), and crabgrass (FIGS. 5A-D) control was enhancedwith the combination of amicarbazone and mesotrione compared to theapplication of each product alone. Decreased bleaching appeared to bedue, in part, to the increased rate of weed desiccation. Mesotrionealone bleached weeds plants for an extended period of time beforeturning brown, while the treatments including amicarbazone caused almostimmediate desiccation without going through the bleaching phase. Poaannua (FIGS. 3A-C) control was enhanced with the combination treatments.The light-colored leaves of the Poa plants made bleaching and generaldesiccation somewhat challenging to distinguish.

Bleaching of St. Augustine (Saphire or Floratam) was minimal regardlessof treatment. Decreased bleaching, faster activity and greater controlwere related to the rate of amicarbazone and mesotrione. The higher rateof control by each product the more complete control and faster controlof weeds sensitive to either amicarbazone or mesotrione. The decrease inthe degree of bleaching was also dependent on the rate of each product;the higher the rate of amicarbazone, the less bleaching occurred.

The results of this Example demonstrate that combinations ofamicarbazone and mesotrione are synergistic in decreasing the bleachingof sensitive weeds. The combination treatments also increased the speedand completeness of kill of sensitive weeds without causing increasedphytotoxicity to desirable turf species. The data further tabulatedbelow, along with FIGS. 2A-B, 3A-C, 4A-C, and 5A-D clearly demonstratethe synergistic activity of the combination of amicarbazone andmesotrione.

Concerning the optimum rate of each herbicide product for best controland least bleaching, 1 oz/acre of Xonerate 70 WDG (amicarbazone) plus 4fl. oz/Acre Tenacity 4 SC (mesotrione) (0.044 lb. active ingredient peracre amicarbazone plus 0.125 lb. active ingredient per acre mesotrione)combined with 4 fl oz/acre Tenacity (40% mesotrione) can providecommercially viable benefits over the use of each herbicide alone.Likewise, 2 oz/Acre Xonerate (0.088 lb. active ingredient per acreamicarbazone) in combination with 4 fl. oz/Acre Tenacity (0.125 lb.active ingredient per acre mesotrione) can provide benefits over theindividual use of each product alone. The specific combination foroptimum synergy and control without undue bleaching depends on the exactturf type and the species of weeds being targeted.

Table 5-3 below summarizes the treatment parameters for Treatmentnumbers 1-9 in Tables 5-4 through 5-11 that follow.

TABLE 5-3 Treatment Parameters Trt Treatment Form Form Rate Other OtherAppl No. Type Name Conc Type Rate Unit Rate Rate Unit Code 1 CHKUntreated Check 2 HERB Amicarbazone 70 WG 0.0219 lb ai/a 0.5 oz/a A 3HERB Amicarbazone 70 WG 0.131 lb ai/a 3.0 oz/a A 4 HERB Tenacity 4 SC0.125 lb ai/a 4.0 oz/a A 5 HERB Tenacity 4 SC 0.25 lb ai/a 8.0 oz/a A 6HERB Tenacity 4 SC 0.125 lb ai/a 4.0 oz/a A HERB Amicarbazone 70 WG0.0219 lb ai/a 0.5 oz/a A 7 HERB Tenacity 4 SC 0.125 lb ai/a 4.0 oz/a AHERB Amicarbazone 70 WG 0.131 lb ai/a 3.0 oz/a A 8 HERB Tenacity 4 SC0.25 lb ai/a 8.0 oz/a A HERB Amicarbazone 70 WG 0.0219 lb ai/a 0.5 oz/aA 9 HERB Tenacity 4 SC 0.25 lb ai/a 8.0 oz/a A HERB Amicarbazone 70 WG0.131 lb ai/a 3.0 oz/a A Type: CHK = Check or Untreated (control); HERB= Herbicide Treatment Name: Untreated Check is not treated| Form Type:WG = Water dispersible granules (a formulation consisting of granules tobe applied after disintegration and dispersion in water); SC =Suspension concentrate (flowable concentrate); a stable suspension ofactive ingredient(s) in water, intended for dilution with water beforeuse; Rate Unit: lb ai/a = pounds active ingredient per acre (Metric = Kgai/ha (hectare)) A Other Rate Unit: oz/a = ounces product per acre

Replications employed include 4, Untreated treatments: 1, Design:Randomized Complete Block, Treatment units: US standard, Treated plotsize Width: 4 feet, Treated plot size Length: 4 feet, Applicationvolume: 50 gal/ac, Mix size: 0.5562 liters, Mix overage: 100%, Formatdefinitions: G-A117.DEF, G-A117.FRM. The results of these treatments aresummarized below in Tables 5-4 to 5-11.

TABLE 5-4 Kentucky Bluegrass Seedling Crop Code POAPR POAPR POAPR POAPRPOAPR POAPR BBCH Scale BGRM BGRM BGRM BGRM BGRM BGRM Crop Name KentuckyKentucky Kentucky Kentucky Kentucky Kentucky bl> bl> bl> bl> bl> bl>Crop Variety — — — — — — Description Seedling Seedling Seedling SeedlingSeedling Seedling Rating Data Type Bleaching Bleaching Injury BleachingBleaching Injury Days After First/Last 6 6 7 7 10 10 10 10 14 14 14 14Applic. Trt-Eval Interval 6 DA-A 7 DA-A 10 DA-A 10 DA-A 14 DA-A 14 DA-ATrt Treatment No. Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 Untreated Check 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.0 c1.0 a 1.0 a 1.3 c 2 Amicarbazone 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.0 c 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.3 c 3Amicarbazone 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.8 c 1.0 a 1.5 a 2.5 c 4 Tenacity 1.0 a 1.0 a1.0 c 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.3 c 5 Tenacity 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.5 c 1.8 a 1.8 a 2.0 c 6Tenacity 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.3 c 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.8 c Amicarbazone 7 Tenacity 1.0a 1.0 a 4.0 b 1.0 a 1.3 a 4.5 b Amicarbazone 8 Tenacity 1.0 a 1.0 a 2.3c 1.0 a 1.3 a 2.8 c Amicarbazone 9 Tenacity 1.0 a 1.0 a 8.0 a 1.0 a 1.3a 8.5 a Amicarbazone LSD (P = .10) 0.00  0.00  1.29  0.60  0.48  1.45 Standard Deviation 0.00  0.00  1.07  0.50  0.40  1.20  CV 0.0  0.0 44.2   46.15  32.46  42.01  Bartlett's X2 0.0  0.0  11.088  0.0   0.09917.602  P(Bartlett's X2) .  .   0.05* .   0.999  0.024* Replicate F 0.000  0.000  1.128  1.000  0.471  0.942 Replicate Prob(F)  1.0000 1.0000  0.3576  0.4098  0.7056  0.4357 Treatment F  0.000  0.00018.566   1.000  1.765 15.365  Treatment Prob(F)  1.0000  1.0000  0.0001 0.4613  0.1345  0.0001 Crop Code POAPR POAPR POAPR POAPR BBCH ScaleBGRM BGRM BGRM BGRM Crop Name Kentucky Kentucky Kentucky Kentucky bl>bl> bl> bl> Crop Variety — — Description Seedling Seedling SeedlingSeedling Rating Data Type Bleaching % Cover % Cover % Cover Days AfterFirst/Last 20 20 20 20 24 24 31 31 Applic. Trt-Eval Interval 20 DA-A 20DA-A 24 DA-A 31 DA-A Trt Treatment No. Name 7 8 9 10 1 Untreated Check1.0 b 7.8 a 8.0 a  8.8 a 2 Amicarbazone 1.0 b  6.5 ab 6.8 ab 8.8 a 3Amicarbazone 1.5 a 4.8 b 4.8 bc 7.5 a 4 Tenacity 1.0 b 5.5 b 5.5 bc 8.0a 5 Tenacity 1.0 b  6.3 ab 6.8 ab 8.0 a 6 Tenacity 1.0 b 5.8 b 6.0 b 8.5 a Amicarbazone 7 Tenacity 1.0 b 3.0 c 3.8 c  5.3 b Amicarbazone 8Tenacity 1.0 b 5.3 b 5.3 bc 7.8 a Amicarbazone 9 Tenacity 1.0 b 1.3 d1.5 d  1.3 c Amicarbazone LSD (P = .10) 0.23  1.31  1.30  1.56  StandardDeviation 0.19  1.09  1.08  1.29  CV 18.23  21.24  20.11   18.2  Bartlett's X2 0.0   7.214 7.444  15.439  P(Bartlett's X2) .   0.5140.49   0.051 Replicate F  1.000  3.458 2.829   3.181 Replicate Prob(F) 0.4098  0.0322  0.0599  0.0422 Treatment F  3.000 12.843  12.538 14.214  Treatment Prob(F)  0.0176  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001 Means followedby same letter do not significantly differ (P = .10,Student-Newman-Keuls) Mean comparisons performed only when AOV TreatmentP(F) is significant at mean comparison OSL.

TABLE 5-5 Kentucky Bluegrass Tillering Crop Code POAPR POAPR POAPR POAPRPOAPR POAPR BBCH Scale BGRM BGRM BGRM BGRM BGRM BGRM Crop Name KentuckyKentucky Kentucky Kentucky Kentucky Kentucky bl> bl> bl> bl> bl> bl>Crop Variety Tillering Tillering Tillering Tillering Tillering TilleringDescription Rating Data Type Bleaching Bleaching Bleaching BleachingBleaching Bleaching Days After 6 6 7 7 10 10 14 14 20 20 31 31First/Last Applic. Trt-Eval Interval 6 DA-A 7 DA-A 10 DA-A 14 DA-A 20DA-A 31 DA-A Trt Treatment No. Name 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 Untreated Check1.0 a 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.0 a 2 Amicarbazone 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.0a 1.3 a 1.0 a 3 Amicarbazone 1.3 a 1.3 a 1.3 a 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.0 a 4Tenacity 1.5 a 1.5 a 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.5 a 1.0 a 5 Tenacity 1.3 a 1.3 a 1.3a 1.3 a 1.0 a 1.0 a 6 Tenacity 1.3 a 1.3 a 1.5 a 1.0 a 1.5 a 1.0 aAmicarbazone 7 Tenacity 1.3 a 1.3 a 1.3 a 1.5 a 1.3 a 1.0 a Amicarbazone8 Tenacity 1.8 a 1.8 a 1.5 a 1.5 a 1.5 a 1.0 a Amicarbazone 9 Tenacity1.3 a 1.3 a 1.5 a 1.8 a 1.5 a 1.0 a Amicarbazone LSD (P = .10) 0.55 0.55  0.65  0.56  0.73  0.00  Standard Deviation 0.45  0.45  0.54  0.46 0.60  0.00  CV 35.52  35.52  43.03  37.55  47.18  0.0  Bartlett's X2 0.105  0.105  2.518  1.577  3.311 0.0  P(Bartlett's X2) 1.00  1.00  0.774  0.665  0.652 .  Replicate F  0.899  0.899  0.352  0.703  2.548 0.000 Replicate Prob(F)  0.4562  0.4562  0.7881  0.5594  0.0797  1.0000Treatment F  1.045  1.045  0.648  1.615  0.592  0.000 Treatment Prob(F) 0.4316  0.4316  0.7303  0.1727  0.7745  1.0000

TABLE 5-6 Mustard Crop Code POAPR SINSS SINSS SINSS SINSS SINSS BBCHScale BRAP BRAP BRAP BRAP BRAP BRAP BRAP Crop Name Mustard MustardMustard Mustard Mustard Mustard Mustard Crop Variety Description RatingData Type Injury Bleaching Injury Bleaching Injury Injury Injury DaysAfter 3 3 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 10 10 14 14 First/Last Applic. Trt-EvalInterval 3DA-A 6 DA-A 6 DA-A 7 DA-A 7 DA-A 10 DA-A 14 DA-A Trt TreatmentNo. Name 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 Untreated Check 1.0 c 2.8 b 1.0 c 1.5 c 1.3 d 1.8 c 1.5 c 2 Amicarbazone 2.8 b  2.0 bc 2.8 c 2.0 bc 4.3 c 6.0 b5.8 b 3 Amicarbazone 6.8 a 1.3 c  6.5 ab 2.0 bc 7.0 b 8.8 a 8.8 a 4Tenacity 3.3 b 5.3 a 2.8 c 5.0 a  4.3 c  7.3 ab 8.3 a 5 Tenacity  2.3 bc5.8 a 2.5 c 5.0 a  4.3 c  6.8 ab 7.8 a 6 Tenacity 5.5 a  2.0 bc 5.5 b2.0 bc  6.0 bc 8.5 a 9.0 a Amicarbazone 7 Tenacity 6.5 a 1.3 c  6.8 ab2.0 bc 7.0 b 8.8 a 9.0 a Amicarbazone 8 Tenacity 5.8 a  2.3 bc 5.5 b 2.3b   6.0 bc 8.5 a 9.0 a Amicarbazone 9 Tenacity 7.5 a 1.3 c 8.0 a 2.0 bc8.8 a 9.0 a 9.0 a Amicarbazone LSD (P = .10) 1.35  0.89  1.30  0.41 1.21  1.35  1.36  Standard Deviation 1.11  0.73  1.07  0.34  1.00  1.11 1.13  CV 24.3   27.83  23.45  12.89   18.5   15.34  14.91  Bartlett's X2 8.347 8.64   0.714 0.767   6.826 16.312  20.518  P(Bartlett's X2) 0.303 0.28   0.994 0.682   0.556  0.022*  0.001* Replicate F  0.261 0.189  0.152 2.800   0.544  1.101  1.460 Replicate Prob(F)  0.8526 0.9030  0.9272  0.0616  0.6570  0.3680  0.2505 Treatment F 17.127 21.567  19.750  63.240  19.037  17.292  19.796  Treatment Prob(F) 0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001 Means followedby same letter do not significantly differ (P = .10,Student-Newman-Keuls) Mean comparisons performed only when AOV TreatmentP(F) is significant at mean comparison OSL.

TABLE 5-7 Poa Crop Code BBCH Scale Crop Name Poa Poa Poa Poa Poa Poa PoaCrop Variety Description Rating Data Type Bleaching Bleaching InjuryBleaching Injury Bleaching Injury Days After 6 6 7 7 10 10 14 14 14 1416 16 16 16 First/Last Applic. Trt-Eval Interval 6 DA-A 7 DA-A 10 DA-A14 DA-A 14 DA-A 16 DA-A 16 DA-A Trt Treatment No. Name 31 32 33 34 35 3637 1 Untreated 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.3 de 1.0 b 2.0 d 1.5 ab 3.0 d Check 2Amicarbazone 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.0 e  1.0 b 1.8 d 1.0 b  2.5 d 3 Amicarbazone1.0 a 1.0 a 3.5 bc 1.8 b 4.8 b 2.0 ab  5.0 bc 4 Tenacity 1.0 a 1.0 a 1.3de 1.3 b 1.8 d 2.3 ab 2.3 d 5 Tenacity 1.3 a 1.3 a  2.3 cde 1.8 b  2.8cd 2.8 ab 2.8 d 6 Tenacity 1.3 a 1.5 a  2.5 cde 2.8 b  4.0 bc 2.8 ab 4.0 cd Amicarbazone 7 Tenacity 1.0 a 1.0 a 4.3 b  2.3 b 5.5 b 2.5 ab6.3 b Amicarbazone 8 Tenacity 1.0 a 1.0 a 2.8 cd 1.8 b  4.3 bc 2.0 ab 4.8 bc Amicarbazone 9 Tenacity 1.3 a 1.0 a 6.0 a  4.5 a 7.0 a 3.8 a 7.8 a Amicarbazone LSD (P = .10) 0.34  0.30  1.02  1.64  1.29  1.33 1.26  Standard Deviation 0.28  0.25  0.84  1.36  1.07  1.10  1.05  CV26.27  22.65  30.6     67.83  28.46  48.35   24.59  Bartlett's X2 0.0  0.061 11.9     10.892  13.605  13.55   11.159  P(Bartlett's X2) .  0.805 0.104   0.092  0.034* 0.06   0.132 Replicate F  1.257  1.6922.235   0.242  1.000 0.519   0.771 Replicate Prob(F)  0.3113  0.1953 0.1101  0.8665  0.4098  0.6732  0.5215 Treatment F  0.771  2.07715.000   2.615 11.854  2.084  12.814  Treatment Prob(F)  0.6311  0.0795 0.0001  0.0326  0.0001  0.0786  0.0001 Crop Code BBCH Scale Crop NamePoa Poa Poa Poa Poa Crop Variety Description Rating Data Type BleachingInjury Injury Injury Injury Days After 20 20 20 20 24 24 31 31 41 41First/Last Applic. Trt-Eval Interval 20 DA-A 20 DA-A 24 DA-A 31 DA-A 31DA-A Trt Treatment No. Name 38 39 40 41 42 1 Untreated Check 1.0 a 2.3 d1.8 d 2.3 c 2.8 c 2 Amicarbazone 1.0 a 2.5 d  2.5 cd 3.3 c 3.8 c 3Amicarbazone 2.0 a 5.5 c 5.3 b  7.0 ab  7.5 ab 4 Tenacity 1.5 a 2.0 d2.0 d 2.8 c 2.8 c 5 Tenacity 1.8 a 2.8 d  2.8 cd 2.8 c 2.8 c 6 Tenacity2.0 a 4.8 c  4.0 bc 6.3 b  6.5 ab Amicarbazone 7 Tenacity 2.3 a 6.8 b7.0 a 8.3 a 8.3 a Amicarbazone 8 Tenacity 1.5 a 5.0 c 4.8 b 6.0 b 6.3 bAmicarbazone 9 Tenacity 2.3 a 8.3 a 8.0 a 8.5 a 8.3 a Amicarbazone LSD(P = .10) 0.76  1.07  1.31  1.46  1.25  Standard Deviation 0.63  0.88 1.08  1.20  1.03  CV 37.13  20.03  25.58  23.07  19.07  Bartlett's X2 6.349  5.253  6.542  6.997  9.142 P(Bartlett's X2)  0.385  0.629  0.478 0.537 0.33  Replicate F  2.316  0.414  0.571  0.153  0.512 ReplicateProb(F)  0.1012  0.7443  0.6393  0.9267  0.6779 Treatment F  2.33324.763  16.95  17.115  21.729  Treatment Prob(F)  0.0518  0.0001  0.0001 0.0001  0.0001 Means followed by same letter do not significantlydiffer (P = .10, Student-Newman-Keuls) Mean comparisons performed onlywhen AOV Treatment P(F) is significant at mean comparison OSL.

TABLE 5-8 Green Foxtail Crop Code BBCH Scale Crop Name Green Green GreenGreen Green Green Green Foxta> Foxta> Foxta> Foxta> Foxta> Foxta> Foxta>Crop Variety Description Rating Data Type Bleaching Injury BleachingInjury Injury Injury Bleaching Days After 16 16 16 16 20 20 20 20 24 2431 31 31 31 First/Last Applic. Trt-Eval Interval 16 DA-A 16 DA-A 20 DA-A20 DA-A 24 DA-A 31 DA-A 31 DA-A Trt Treatment No. Name 49 50 51 52 53 5455 56 1 Untreated 1.3 d 1.5 d 1.5 c 1.8 d  1.8 d 4.0 cd 3.5 a Check 2Amicarbazone 1.0 d 1.8 d 1.3 c 1.8 d  2.0 d 2.8 d  3.0 a 3 Amicarbazone1.0 d  2.8 cd 1.3 c 3.5 cd 3.8 c 5.3 bc 3.3 a 4 Tenacity 4.0 b 3.8 c 3.0 ab 3.8 cd 4.0 c 5.0 bc 3.3 a 5 Tenacity 5.3 a 6.0 b 3.8 a 5.5 bc5.8 b  6.3 abc 2.5 a 6 Tenacity 2.8 c 5.5 b  2.0 bc 5.5 bc 6.3 b  6.5abc 2.3 a Amicarbazone 7 Tenacity 1.3 d 7.5 a 1.5 c 7.5 ab  7.5 ab 8.0a  3.0 a Amicarbazone 8 Tenacity 3.0 c 7.8 a  2.3 bc 7.5 ab  7.3 ab 7.5ab 1.8 a Amicarbazone 9 Tenacity 1.5 d 8.5 a 1.3 c 8.3 a  8.8 a 8.3 a 1.3 a Amicarbazone LSD (P = .10) 0.74  1.25  0.84  1.56  1.42  1.71 2.03  . Standard Deviation 0.61  1.03  0.70  1.29  1.18  1.41  1.68  .CV 26.08  20.59  35.35  25.75   22.55  23.79   63.73  . Bartlett's X22.66  10.181   4.884 15.792  17.483  11.091  17.093  . P(Bartlett's X2)0.85   0.253  0.674  0.045*  0.025* 0.135   0.029* . Replicate F  1.000 1.747  1.429 1.251   1.977 1.833   1.869 Replicate Prob(F)  0.4098 0.1843  0.2590  0.3132  0.1444  0.1680  0.1618 Treatment F 24.975 26.764   6.486 14.631  17.735  6.931   0.820 Treatment Prob(F)  0.0001 0.0001  0.0002  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.5929 Crop Code BBCH ScaleCrop Name Green Green Green Green Green Foxta> Foxta> Foxta> Foxta>Foxta> Crop Variety Description Rating Data Type Injury Injury BleachingBleaching Injury Days After 6 6 7 7 10 10 14 14 14 14 First/Last Applic.Trt-Eval Interval 6 DA-A 7 DA-A 10 DA-A 14 DA-A 14 DA-A Trt TreatmentNo. Name 44 45 46 47 48 1 Untreated Check 1.3 f   1.0 c 1.0 c 1.3 d 1-0g 2 Amicarbazone 1.5 f   1.5 c 1.0 c 1.0 d 1.3 g  3 Amicarbazone 3.8 de3.5 b 1.0 c 1.0 d 2.5 f  4 Tenacity 3.3 e  3.8 b 5.0 a 5.0 b 4.3 e  5Tenacity 4.0 de 4.5 b 5.8 a 6.0 a 5.8 d  6 Tenacity 5.3 cd 6.0 a 2.8 b2.8 c  6.5 cd Amicarbazone 7 Tenacity 7.5 ab 8.0 a 1.0 c 1.0 d  7.8 abAmicarbazone 8 Tenacity 6.5 bc 7.0 a 2.8 b 2.5 c  7.0 bc Amicarbazone 9Tenacity 8.3 a  8.0 a 1.3 c 1.5 d 8.5 a  Amicarbazone LSD (P = .10)1.34  1.46  0.97  0.83  0.95  Standard Deviation 1.11  1.20  0.80  0.69 0.78  CV 24.21   25.05  33.46  28.04  15.87  Bartlett's X2 14.914  7.631  2.954  1.944 9.714 P(Bartlett's X2) 0.061   0.266  0.566  0.8570.205 Replicate F 1.406   1.604  1.913  0.158 4.992 Replicate Prob(F) 0.2653  0.2146  0.1544  0.9237  0.0079 Treatment F 20.098  18.968 21.435  29.631  51.541  Treatment Prob(F)  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001 0.0001  0.0001 Means followed by same letter do not significantlydiffer (P = .10, Student-Newman-Keuls) Mean comparisons performed onlywhen AOV Treatment P(F) is significant at mean comparison OSL.

TABLE 5-9 Crabgrass Crop Code BBCH Scale Crop Name Crabgrass CrabgrassCrabgrass Crabgrass Crabgrass Crabgrass Crabgrass Crabgrass CrabgrassCrop Variety Description Rating Data Type Bleaching Injury BleachingInjury Bleaching Bleaching Injury Bleaching Injury Days After 6 6 6 6 77 7 7 10 10 14 14 14 14 16 16 16 16 First/Last Applic. Trt-Eval Interval6 DA-A 6 DA-A 7 DA-A 7 DA-A 10 DA-A 14 DA-A 14 DA-A 16 DA-A 16 DA-A TrtTreatment No. Name 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 1 Untreated Check 1.0 f1.0 d 1.0 c 1.0 e 1.0 c 1.0 c 1.0 d 1.0 c 1.0 d 2 Amicarbazone 1.3 f 1.5d 1.0 c 1.0 e 1.0 c 1.0 c 1.0 d 1.3 c 1.3 d 3 Amicarbazone 1.0 f 1.0 d1.0 c 1.0 e 1.0 c 1.0 c 1.0 d 1.0 c 1.5 d 4 Tenacity  6.0 a 5.3 c 6.5 a5.3 d 7.3 a 7.0 a 5.8 c 7.3 a  7.5 bc 5 Tenacity  5.3 b 5.8 c 6.0 a  6.0cd 6.8 a 6.5 a 6.3 c 6.5 a  7.5 bc 6 Tenacity  3.0 d 5.0 c 4.3 b  6.8 bc5.0 b 4.3 b 7.0 b 3.5 b 7.3 c Amicarbazone 7 Tenacity  2.3 e 6.8 b 2.5 c7.3 b 1.8 c 2.0 c 8.5 a 2.3 c 8.5 a Amicarbazone 8 Tenacity  3.8 c 5.5 c4.5 b  6.0 cd 4.3 b 3.5 b 7.3 b 3.8 b  8.3 ab Amicarbazone 9 Tenacity1.5 f 8.3 a 1.3 c 8.3 a 1.0 c 1.0 c 9.0 a 1.3 c 9.0 a Amicarbazone LSD(P = .10) 0.69  0.87  1.04  0.78  1.11  1.09  0.55  1.09  0.70  StandardDeviation 0.57  0.72  0.86  0.65  0.92  0.90  0.45  0.90  0.58  CV20.49   16.13  27.53  13.67  28.57  29.81  8.74  29.19  10.01 Bartlett's X2  2.475  4.552  7.441  3.943  6.356 1.5   1.172  8.4042.53  P(Bartlett's X2) 0.78   0.602 0.19   0.558  0.174  0.827  0.8830.21   0.865 Replicate F  0.229  0.432  1.312  0.800  1.049  2.125 0.494  1.771  0.308 Replicate Prob(F)   0.8756  0.7317  0.2934  0.5061 0.3889  0.1235  0.6896  0.1795  0.8196 Treatment F 43.286  54.459 27.435  81.667  32.344  28.875  211.382  28.234  141.420  TreatmentProb(F)   0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001 0.0001 Crop Code BBCH Scale Crop Name Crabgrass Crabgrass CrabgrassCrabgrass Crabgrass Crabgrass Crabgrass Crabgrass Crop VarietyDescription Rating Data Type Bleaching Injury Injury % Crab Cvr % CrabCvr Bleaching % Crab Cvr Bleaching Days After 20 20 20 20 24 24 24 24 3131 31 31 41 41 41 41 First/Last Applic. Trt-Eval Interval 20 DA-A 20 DA-24 DA-A 24 DA-A 31 DA-A 31 DA-A 41 DA-A 41 DA-A Trt Treatment No. Name66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 1 Untreated Check 1.0 d 1.0 c 1.0 c 8.8 a 8.8 a1.0 b 9.0 a 1.0 a 2 Amicarbazone 1.3 d 1.3 c 1.5 c 7.8 a 8.3 a 1.0 b 9.0a 1.0 a 3 Amicarbazone 1.0 d 1.5 c 1.5 c 6.3 b 6.3 b 1.0 b 6.8 b 1.0 a 4Tenacity 7.3 a 7.8 b 7.0 b 2.8 c 3.3 c 2.3 a 2.0 c 1.0 a 5 Tenacity 5.5b 7.5 b 7.0 b  1.8 cd 2.0 d 2.5 a 1.5 c 1.0 a 6 Tenacity  3.8 bc  8.0 ab 7.8 ab 1.3 d 1.0 d 1.3 b 1.3 c 1.0 a Amicarbazone 7 Tenacity  2.8 cd 8.5 ab  8.3 ab 1.0 d 1.0 d 1.3 b 1.3 c 1.0 a Amicarbazone 8 Tenacity 4.3 bc  8.5 ab  8.0 ab  1.5 cd 1.0 d 1.3 b 1.3 c 1.0 a Amicarbazone 9Tenacity 1.5 d 9.0 a 9.0 a 1.0 d 1.0 d 1.0 b 1.8 c 1.0 a AmicarbazoneLSD (P = .10) 1.62  0.72  0.95  1.04  1.13  0.61  0.92  0.00  StandardDeviation 1.34  0.59  0.79  0.86  0.94  0.50  0.76  0.00  CV 42.53 10.04  13.87  24.17  25.97  36.33  20.37  0.0  Bartlett's X2 14.194  2.548  0.246 10.589  10.672   3.123 13.048  0.0  P(Bartlett's X2) 0.028*  0.863  0.999  0.102  0.031*  0.537  0.042* .  Replicate F 3.922  1.060  0.360  1.705  3.747  2.473  5.000  0.000 ReplicateProb(F)  0.0207  0.3846  0.7827  0.1926  0.0244  0.0861  0.0078  1.0000Treatment F 11.119  140.921  70.888  53.050  48.253   5.182 81.429  0.000 Treatment Prob(F)  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0008 0.0001  1.0000 Means followed by same letter do not significantlydiffer (P = .10, Student-Newman-Keuls) Mean comparisons performed onlywhen AOV Treatment P(F) is significant at mean comparison OSL.

TABLE 5-10 Augustine-Sapphire Crop Code BBCH Scale Crop Name St.   St.    St.     St.    St.     St.    St.    St.    St.    Augusti>Augusti> Augusti> Augusti> Augusti> Augusti> Augusti> Augusti> Augusti>Sapphire Sapphire Sapphire Sapphire Sapphire Sapphire Sapphire SapphireSapphire Crop Variety Description Rating Data Type Bleaching BleachingBleaching Bleaching Bleaching Bleaching Bleaching Bleaching TurfQualityDays After 6 6 7 7 10 10 14 14 16 16 20 20 31 31 41 41 41 41 First/LastApplic. Trt-Eval Interval 6 DA-A 7 DA-A 10 DA-A 14 DA-A 16 DA-A 20 DA-A31 DA-A 31 DA-A 31 DA-A Trt Treatment No. Name 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 8283 1 Untreated Check 1.0 a 1.0 b 1.0 d 1.0 c 1.0 d 1.0 c 1.0 a 1.0 a 7.0a 2 Amicarbazone 1.0 a 1.0 b 1.0 d 1.0 c 1.0 d 1.5 c 1.0 a 1.0 a 7.0 a 3Amicarbazone 1.5 a 1.0 b 1.0 d 1.0 c 1.0 d 1.0 c 1.0 a 1.0 a 7.5 a 4Tenacity 2.0 a 2.0 a  1.5 cd 1.0 c 1.0 d 1.0 c 1.5 a 1.0 a 7.0 a 5Tenacity 2.0 a 2.0 a 3.5 a  2.5 ab 3.0 b  3.0 ab 2.5 a 1.0 a 7.0 a 6Tenacity 2.0 a 2.0 a   2.5 abc  2.0 abc 2.0 c  2.5 abc 2.5 a 1.0 a 7.0 aAmicarbazone 7 Tenacity 1.5 a  1.5 ab  2.0 bcd  1.5 bc 2.0 c  2.0 bc 1.0a 1.0 a 7.5 a Amicarbazone 8 Tenacity 1.5 a 2.0 a  2.0 bcd  1.5 bc  1.5cd  2.5 abc 2.0 a 1.0 a 7.0 a Amicarbazone 9 Tenacity 1.0 a 2.0 a  3.0ab 3.0 a 4.0 a 3.5 a 3.0 a 1.0 a 7.5 a Amicarbazone LSD (P = .10) 0.79 0.44  0.79  0.79  0.44  0.88  1.14  0.00  0.79  Standard Deviation 0.42 0.24  0.42  0.42  0.24  0.47  0.61  0.00  0.42  CV 28.33  14.63  21.85 26.37  12.86  23.57  35.56  0.0  5.93  Bartlett's X2 0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0 0.0  0.0   0.748 0.0  0.0  P(Bartlett's X2) .  .  .  .  .  .   0.862 . .  Replicate F  0.308  1.000  0.308  0.308  1.000  1.000  1.333  0.000 0.308 Replicate Prob(F)  0.5943  0.3466  0.5943  0.5943  0.3466  0.3466 0.2815  1.0000  0.5943 Treatment F  2.077  8.500  9.308  6.077 40.500  7.875  3.370  0.000  0.692 Treatment Prob(F)  0.1607  0.0033  0.0024 0.0098  0.0001  0.0043  0.0526  1.0000  0.6924 Means followed by sameletter do not significantly differ (P = .10, Student-Newman-Keuls) Meancomparisons performed only when AOV Treatment P(F) is significant atmean comparison OSL.

TABLE 5-11 St. Augustine-Floratum Crop Code BBCH Scale Crop Name St.   St.   St.    St.    St.    St.    St.    St.    St.   Augusti> Augusti>Augusti> Augusti> Augusti> Augusti> Augusti> Augusti> Augusti> FloratamFloratam Floratam Floratam Floratam Floratam Floratam Floratam FloratamCrop Variety Description Rating Data Type Bleaching Bleaching BleachingBleaching Bleaching Bleaching Bleaching Bleaching TurfQuality Days After6 6 7 7 10 10 14 14 16 16 20 20 31 31 41 41 41 41 First/Last Applic.Trt-Eval Interval 6 DA-A 7 DA-A 10 DA-A 14 DA-A 16 DA-A 20 DA-A 31 DA-A31 DA-A 31 DA-A Trt Treatment No. Name 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 1Untreated Check 1.0 a 1.0 c  1.0 c 1.0 c 1.0 e 1.0 b 1.0 c 1.0 a 6.0 c 2 Amicarbazone 1.0 a 1.0 c  1.0 c 1.0 c 1.0 e 1.0 b 1.0 c 1.0 a 6.8 bc 3Amicarbazone 1.0 a 1.0 c  1.0 c 1.0 c 1.3 e 1.3 b 1.0 c 1.0 a 7.3 ab 4Tenacity 1.3 a 2.0 bc  3.0 ab  2.8 ab  2.8 cd 3.3 a  2.5 abc 1.0 a 6.5bc 5 Tenacity 2.0 a 2.8 ab  4.0 ab 3.8 a 4.8 a 4.5 a 4.0 a 1.0 a 6.5 bc6 Tenacity 2.0 a 2.3 ab  3.5 ab  2.8 ab  4.0 ab 4.3 a 3.8 a 1.0 a 7.0 abAmicarbazone 7 Tenacity 1.3 a 1.8 bc 2.5 b  2.0 bc 2.3 d 2.8 a  1.8 bc1.0 a 7.8 a  Amicarbazone 8 Tenacity 2.0 a 3.3 a  4.5 a 3.5 a  3.5 bc3.3 a  2.8 ab 1.0 a 6.5 bc Amicarbazone 9 Tenacity 2.0 a 2.5 ab  3.8 ab3.3 a  4.5 ab 4.5 a 4.0 a 1.0 a 7.0 ab Amicarbazone LSD(P = .10) 0.65 0.77  1.00  0.73  0.85  1.13  1.05  0.00  0.55  Standard Deviation 0.54 0.63  0.82  0.60  0.70  0.93  0.87  0.00  0.45  CV 35.86  32.64   30.62 25.75  25.34  32.52  35.89  0.0  6.67  Bartlett's X2  1.482 4.118  1.836  0.131 4.28   6.623  4.477 0.0  0.173  P(Bartlett's X2) 0.83 0.533   0.871 1.00   0.639  0.357  0.483 .  0.999  Replicate F  0.6401.931   1.673  6.769  6.131  3.455  4.074  0.000 0.494  ReplicateProb(F)  0.5967  0.1515  0.1992  0.0018  0.0030  0.0323  0.0180  1.0000 0.6896 Treatment F  3.240 6.793  11.367  13.846  17.972   9.898  8.889 0.000 5.090  Treatment Prob(F)  0.0121  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001  0.0001 0.0001  0.0001  1.0000  0.0009 Means followed by same letter do notsignificantly differ (P = .10, Student-Newman-Keuls) Mean comparisonsperformed only when AOV Treatment P(F) is significant at mean comparisonOSL.

Example 6 A. Pre Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)as a pre emergence application against weeds in maize (variety PHI2369W) was determined.

Three trials were conducted at a site with a history of weeds. Thetrials were executed under moderate weather conditions. Efficacy andvisual phytotoxicity assessments were performed in triplicate. Normalpractices were carried out to control insects and fungi. Crops wereprovided in 55 cm row width, at a sowing rate of 65,000 plants/ha, andat a sowing depth of five to eight cm. Soil class was clay with a claycontent of about 40%. The site in this Example had been previously usedfor maize. Trial design was randomized blocks with a plot size of 20 m²replicated four times. Municipal water was used for all applications(pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-1 was conducted at preemergence stage 1 day after planting seed. Application of the treatmentswas conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period, dry bulbtemperature was about 30° C., wet bulb temperature was about 26° C.,relative humidity was about 70%, cloud cover was about 100%, wind speedwas about 1 m/s, and the wind was out of the east. Treatments wereadministered with a multi-spray gas sprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80nozzle. Spacing was 50 cm, with a height of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, ata ground speed of 1 m/s, and a calibration mean output of 330 L/ha. Thesoil temperature over the application period averaged to about 28° C.and the soil remained moist and fine.

TABLE 6-1 Treatments Dosage Dosage rate rate (g/ha No Treatments(gai/ha) or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG 52.5 75 2DINAMIC ® 700WDG 70 100 3 DINAMIC ® 700WDG 87.5 125 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG105 150 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG 210 300 6 Galago 480SC 48 100 7 Galago 480SC96 200 8 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 48 100 9 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 72 150 10 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago480SC 48 100 11 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC 72 150 12DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 48 100 13 DINAMIC ® 700WDG +87.5 125 Galago 480SC 72 150 14 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 175 250 Galago 480SC144 300

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-2 to 6-4 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover the 6 weeks.

TABLE 6-2 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage 4Leaves BBCH scale 14 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 28 mm

TABLE 6-3 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage 6Leaves BBCH scale 16 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 6 mm

TABLE 6-4 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage 8leaves BBCH scale: 18 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 23 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-5 through 6-7. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-5 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTTE IPOPU AMAHY Untreated control I 30 4030 % soil cover ii 40 30 30 iii 40 40 20 iv 30 40 30 Mean 35 38 28 1DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 20 80 90 ii 30 80 80 iii 20 70 80 iv 20 80 80 Mean23 78 83 2 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 20 80 90 ii 30 70 80 iii 30 80 80 iv 3070 80 Mean 28 75 83 3 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 30 90 95 ii 30 70 90 iii 3080 90 iv 30 80 90 Mean 30 80 91 4 DINAMIC ® at 150 g I 50 90 80 ii 30 8090 iii 40 80 90 iv 30 80 90 Mean 38 83 88 5 DINAMIC ® at 300 g I 50 90100 ii 50 95 100 iii 60 100 90 iv 50 90 95 Mean 53 94 96 6 Galago at 100ml I 60 90 80 ii 60 90 90 iii 70 90 80 iv 60 90 90 Mean 63 90 85 7Galago at 200 ml I 80 90 90 ii 70 95 90 iii 70 100 95 iv 80 95 95 Mean75 95 93 8 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 60 90 90 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 80 90 iii60 90 80 iv 60 90 80 Mean 60 88 85 9 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 90 100Galago at 150 ml ii 80 90 95 iii 80 95 90 iv 80 95 95 Mean 78 93 95 10DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 50 90 90 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 90 90 iii 70 90 90iv 70 95 90 Mean 63 91 90 11 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 70 90 100 Galago at150 ml ii 70 90 95 iii 80 90 100 iv 70 90 95 Mean 73 90 98 12 DINAMIC ®at 125 g I 70 90 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 70 80 95 iii 60 90 100 iv 70 9090 Mean 68 88 95 13 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 90 100 100 Galago at 150 ml ii80 100 100 iii 80 90 100 iv 80 95 100 Mean 83 96 100 14 DINAMIC ® at 250g I 90 100 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 90 100 100 iii 95 95 100 iv 95 95 100Mean 93 98 100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea;AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus

TABLE 6-6 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTTE IPOPU AMAHY Untreated control I 30 4030 % soil cover ii 30 30 40 iii 30 40 30 iv 20 40 40 Mean 28 38 35 1DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 20 70 80 ii 20 70 80 iii 20 70 70 iv 20 70 80 Mean20 70 78 2 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 20 80 80 ii 30 70 80 iii 20 70 80 iv 2070 80 Mean 23 73 80 3 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 30 80 90 ii 30 70 90 iii 2070 90 iv 30 80 90 Mean 28 75 90 4 DINAMIC ® at 150 g I 40 80 80 ii 30 8090 iii 40 80 80 iv 20 80 90 Mean 33 80 85 5 DINAMIC ® at 300 g I 40 90100 ii 50 90 100 iii 50 100 90 iv 50 90 90 Mean 48 93 95 6 Galago at 100ml I 50 90 80 ii 60 80 80 iii 60 80 80 iv 60 90 80 Mean 58 85 80 7Galago at 200 ml I 80 90 90 ii 60 90 90 iii 70 100 90 iv 70 95 90 Mean70 94 90 8 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 60 90 90 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 80 90 iii50 80 80 iv 60 80 80 Mean 58 83 85 9 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 90 100Galago at 150 ml ii 70 90 90 iii 70 90 90 iv 80 95 95 Mean 73 91 94 10DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 50 90 90 Galago at 100 ml ii 50 80 80 iii 70 80 90iv 60 90 90 Mean 58 85 88 11 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 70 90 100 Galago at150 ml ii 70 80 95 iii 70 90 98 iv 70 90 95 Mean 70 88 97 12 DINAMIC ®at 125 g I 70 90 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 70 80 90 iii 60 90 100 iv 60 9090 Mean 65 88 94 13 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 90 100 100 Galago at 150 ml ii80 100 100 iii 70 90 100 iv 80 98 100 Mean 80 97 100 14 DINAMIC ® at 250g I 90 100 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 90 100 100 iii 90 95 100 iv 90 95 100Mean 90 98 100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea;AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus

TABLE 6-7 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTTE IPOPU AMAHY Untreated control I 20 4040 % soil cover ii 30 30 40 iii 20 50 30 iv 20 40 40 Mean 23 40 38 1DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 20 70 80 ii 20 70 80 iii 10 70 80 iv 20 70 80 Mean18 70 80 2 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 20 70 80 ii 20 70 80 iii 20 70 80 iv 1070 80 Mean 18 70 80 3 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 20 80 90 ii 30 70 90 iii 2070 90 iv 30 70 90 Mean 25 73 90 4 DINAMIC ® at 150 g I 30 70 90 ii 30 8090 iii 30 80 90 iv 20 70 90 Mean 28 75 90 5 DINAMIC ® at 300 g I 30 80100 ii 40 90 100 iii 50 98 90 iv 40 90 90 Mean 40 90 95 6 Galago at 100ml I 50 80 90 ii 50 80 80 iii 50 80 70 iv 50 80 80 Mean 50 80 80 7Galago at 200 ml I 70 90 90 ii 60 90 90 iii 60 98 90 iv 60 90 90 Mean 6392 90 8 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 50 80 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 80 80 iii 5080 80 iv 60 80 80 Mean 55 80 80 9 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 90 100 Galagoat 150 ml ii 70 90 90 iii 70 90 90 iv 70 90 90 Mean 70 90 93 10DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 60 80 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 50 80 80 iii 70 80 90iv 70 90 90 Mean 63 83 85 11 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 70 90 100 Galago at150 ml ii 70 80 95 iii 60 80 95 iv 70 90 95 Mean 68 85 96 12 DINAMIC ®at 125 g I 60 80 90 Galago at 100 ml ii 70 80 90 iii 60 80 100 iv 60 9090 Mean 63 83 93 13 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 80 100 100 Galago at 150 ml ii80 100 100 iii 70 90 100 iv 80 95 100 Mean 78 96 100 14 DINAMIC ® at 250g I 80 100 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 90 100 100 iii 90 90 100 iv 90 95 100Mean 88 96 100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea;AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus

DINAMIC® 700WDG at 100 g/ha alone showed marginal control of Amaranthushybridus, but the rest of the spectrum was insufficiently controlled byrates up to 300 g/ha. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 300 mL/ha controlled Ipomoeapurpurea, but Rottboellia exaltata was still too tough to be controlled.Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha showed marginal control of Ipomoea purpureaand Amaranthus hybridus, but could also not control Rottboelliaexaltata. The combination (DINAMIC® at 75 g/ha+Galago at 100 mL/ha)resulted in marginal control of Amaranthus hybridus and Ipomoeapurpurea. DINAMIC® at 250 g/ha+Galago at 300 mL/ha was the onlytreatment which could control Rottboellia exaltata with satisfactoryresults. There were no visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedthroughout the growing season. DINAMIC® at 300 g/ha can be used tocontrol Amaranthus hybridus and Ipomoea purpurea. Galago at 200 mL/hacan be used to control Amaranthus hybridus and Ipomoea purpurea.DINAMIC® at 75 g/ha+Galago at 100 mL/ha can be used to controlAmaranthus hybridus and Ipomoea purpurea. DINAMIC® at 250 g/ha+Galago at300 mL/ha can be used to control Amaranthus hybridus, Ipomoea purpureaand Rottboellia exaltata.

B. Pre Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)as a pre emergence application against weeds in maize (variety PHI32Y85) was determined.

Trials were conducted at a site with a history of weeds. The trials wereexecuted under moderate weather conditions. Efficacy and visualphytotoxicity assessments were performed in triplicate. Normal practiceswere carried out to control insects and fungi. Crops were provided in 76cm row width, at a sowing rate of 65,000 plants/ha, and at a sowingdepth of five to eight cm. Soil class was clay with a clay content ofabout 35%. The site in this Example had been previously used for soyabeans. Trial design was randomized blocks with a plot size of 20 m²replicated four times. Municipal water was used for all applications(pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-8 was conducted at preemergence stage 1 day after planting seed. Application of the treatmentswas conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period, dry bulbtemperature was about 26° C., wet bulb temperature was about 23° C.,relative humidity was about 70%, cloud cover was about 50%, wind speedwas about 0 m/s. Treatments were administered with a multi-spray gassprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80 nozzle. Spacing was 50 cm, with aheight of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, at a ground speed of 1 m/s, and acalibration mean output of 330 L/ha. The soil temperature over theapplication period averaged to about 24° C. and the soil remained moistand fine.

TABLE 6-8 Treatments Dosage rate Dosage rate No Treatments (gai/ha)(g/ha or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG 52.5 75 2DINAMIC ® 700WDG 70 100 3 DINAMIC ® 700WDG 87.5 125 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG105 150 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG 210 300 6 Galago 480SC 48 100 7 Galago 480SC96 200 8 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 48 100 9 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 72 150 10 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago480SC 48 100 11 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC 72 150 12DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 48 100 13 DINAMIC ® 700WDG +87.5 125 Galago 480SC 72 150 14 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 175 250 Galago 480SC144 300

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-9 to 6-11 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover the 6 weeks.

TABLE 6-9 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage3-4 Leaves BBCH scale 13 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 0 mm

TABLE 6-10 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage6 Leaves BBCH scale 16 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 18 mm

TABLE 6-11 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage8 Leaves BBCH scale 18 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 12 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-12 through 6-14. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-12 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I30 20 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 35 18 28 20 1 DINAMIC ® at I 60 50 70 50 75 g ii 70 40 90 60 iii 6040 80 60 iv 70 50 70 60 Mean 65 45 78 58 2 DINAMIC ® at I 70 50 70 50100 g ii 70 40 70 50 iii 70 50 80 60 iv 70 50 80 60 Mean 70 48 75 55 3DINAMIC ® at I 60 125 g 70 50 80 ii 70 50 90 70 iii 80 40 80 70 iv 70 4080 70 Mean 73 45 83 68 4 DINAMIC ® at I 60 100 70 150 g 80 ii 90 70 10080 iii 80 80 95 80 iv 80 60 100 80 Mean 83 68 99 78 5 DINAMIC ® at I 300g 90 90 100 80 ii 80 80 95 95 iii 80 80 100 90 iv 90 90 100 90 Mean 8477 99 89 6 Galago at I 70 70 80 70 100 ml ii 70 70 70 80 iii 60 60 80 70iv 70 70 90 80 Mean 68 68 80 75 7 Galago at I 70 80 80 80 200 ml ii 9090 90 90 iii 80 90 90 90 iv 80 80 90 80 Mean 80 85 88 85 8 DINAMIC ® atI 75 g 70 60 70 70 Galago at ii 80 70 90 90 100 ml iii 80 70 90 80 iv 7060 80 80 Mean 75 65 83 80 9 DINAMIC ® at I 75 g 80 70 70 70 Galago at ii80 70 90 70 150 ml iii 70 80 90 80 iv 70 70 90 80 Mean 75 73 85 75 10DINAMIC ® at I 100 g 70 70 80 80 Galago at ii 80 80 90 90 100 ml iii 8070 95 80 iv 80 70 90 80 Mean 78 73 89 83 11 DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 95 95100 g Galago at ii 90 80 90 95 150 ml iii 80 80 95 90 iv 90 70 95 95Mean 85 78 94 94 12 DINAMIC ® at I 80 70 90 90 125 g Galago at ii 80 8090 80 100 ml iii 80 70 98 90 iv 80 70 95 95 Mean 80 73 93 89 13DINAMIC ® at I 90 90 95 90 125 g Galago at ii 80 90 100 70 150 ml iii 9090 95 80 iv 80 80 100 90 Mean 85 88 98 83 14 DINAMIC ® at I 90 100 100100 250 g Galago at ii 100 100 100 100 300 ml iii 95 100 100 100 iv 95100 100 100 Mean 95 100 100 100 DIGSA = Digitaria sanguinalis; POROL =Portulaca oleracea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus; COMBE = Commelinabenghalensis

TABLE 6-13 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I30 20 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 35 18 28 20 1 DINAMIC ® at I 50 40 70 50 75 g ii 60 40 80 50 iii 6040 80 50 iv 70 50 80 50 Mean 60 43 78 50 2 DINAMIC ® at I 70 40 70 50100 g ii 60 40 70 50 iii 60 50 80 60 iv 70 40 80 60 Mean 65 43 75 55 3DINAMIC ® at I 60 125 g 70 40 80 ii 70 50 80 70 iii 70 40 80 60 iv 70 4080 70 Mean 70 43 80 65 4 DINAMIC ® at I 60 100 70 150 g 80 ii 80 60 9870 iii 70 80 90 70 iv 80 50 100 80 Mean 78 63 97 73 5 DINAMIC ® at I 300g 80 90 100 80 ii 80 70 95 90 iii 80 80 100 80 iv 90 80 100 90 Mean 8072 98 79 6 Galago at I 70 70 80 70 100 ml ii 60 70 70 70 iii 60 60 70 70iv 60 70 80 80 Mean 63 68 75 73 7 Galago at I 70 80 80 80 200 ml ii 8080 90 80 iii 80 80 80 80 iv 80 80 90 80 Mean 78 80 85 80 8 DINAMIC ® atI 75 g 70 60 70 70 Galago at ii 70 60 90 80 100 ml iii 70 70 80 80 iv 7060 70 70 Mean 70 63 78 75 9 DINAMIC ® at I 75 g 70 70 70 70 Galago at ii70 60 90 70 150 ml iii 60 70 80 70 iv 70 70 90 70 Mean 68 68 83 70 10DINAMIC ® at I 100 g 70 70 80 80 Galago at ii 80 70 80 80 100 ml iii 7070 90 70 iv 80 70 90 80 Mean 75 70 85 78 11 DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 90 90100 g Galago at ii 80 70 90 90 150 ml iii 70 80 90 90 iv 90 70 90 90Mean 80 75 90 90 12 DINAMIC ® at I 70 70 90 80 125 g Galago at ii 80 7090 80 100 ml iii 80 70 95 90 iv 70 70 90 90 Mean 75 70 91 85 13DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 90 80 125 g Galago at ii 80 90 100 70 150 ml iii 8090 95 80 iv 70 80 100 80 Mean 78 85 96 78 14 DINAMIC ® at I 90 100 100100 250 g Galago at ii 98 100 100 100 300 ml iii 90 100 100 100 iv 95100 100 100 Mean 93 100 100 100 DIGSA = Digitaria sanguinalis; POROL =Portulaca oleracea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus; COMBE = Commelinabenghalensis

TABLE 6-14 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I20 30 30 20 % soil cover ii 30 20 20 30 iii 30 30 30 10 iv 20 20 40 20Mean 25 25 30 20 1 DINAMIC ® at I 50 40 70 50 75 g ii 60 40 80 50 iii 5030 70 50 iv 60 40 80 50 Mean 55 38 75 50 2 DINAMIC ® at I 60 40 70 50100 g ii 60 40 70 50 iii 60 40 80 50 iv 60 40 80 60 Mean 60 40 75 53 3DINAMIC ® at I 60 125 g 70 40 80 ii 70 50 80 60 iii 60 40 80 60 iv 70 4080 70 Mean 68 43 80 63 4 DINAMIC ® at I 60 95 70 150 g 70 ii 70 50 95 60iii 70 70 90 70 iv 80 50 100 70 Mean 73 58 95 68 5 DINAMIC ® at I 300 g80 80 100 80 ii 70 70 95 90 iii 80 70 95 80 iv 90 80 100 80 Mean 77 6696 75 6 Galago at I 70 70 70 70 100 ml ii 60 70 70 70 iii 60 60 70 70 iv50 60 80 70 Mean 60 65 73 70 7 Galago at I 60 70 80 80 200 ml ii 70 7090 80 iii 80 80 80 80 iv 80 80 90 80 Mean 73 75 85 80 8 DINAMIC ® at I75 g 70 60 70 70 Galago at ii 70 50 80 70 100 ml iii 60 60 70 70 iv 6060 70 70 Mean 65 58 73 70 9 DINAMIC ® at I 75 g 60 70 80 70 Galago at ii70 60 90 70 150 ml iii 60 60 80 80 iv 70 70 90 70 Mean 65 65 85 73 10DINAMIC ® at I 100 g 70 70 80 80 Galago at ii 70 60 80 70 100 ml iii 7070 80 70 iv 80 70 80 80 Mean 73 68 80 75 11 DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 90 80100 g Galago at ii 80 70 90 80 150 ml iii 70 70 90 80 iv 80 70 90 90Mean 78 73 90 83 12 DINAMIC ® at I 70 70 90 80 125 g Galago at ii 80 7095 80 100 ml iii 80 60 95 80 iv 70 70 90 80 Mean 75 68 93 80 13DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 90 90 125 g Galago at ii 80 90 98 80 150 ml iii 8090 90 80 iv 70 90 100 90 Mean 78 88 95 85 14 DINAMIC ® at I 90 100 100100 250 g Galago at ii 95 100 100 100 300 ml iii 90 100 100 100 iv 90100 100 100 Mean 91 100 100 100 DIGSA = Digitaria sanguinalis; POROL =Portulaca oleracea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus; COMBE = Commelinabenghalensis

DINAMIC® 700WDG at 125 g/ha alone showed marginal control of Amaranthushybridus, but the rest of the spectrum was insufficiently controlled byrates as high as 300 g/ha. Galago 480SC at 200 mL/ha controlledAmaranthus hybridus and showed marginal control of Commilinabenghalensis. The combination (DINAMIC® at 75 g/ha+Galago at 150 mL/ha)resulted in satisfactory control of Amaranthus hybridus only. However,when the DINAMIC® rate of this combination was increased to 100 g/haCommilina benghalensis was also controlled satisfactorily. Should theDINAMIC® rate of the combination be increased further to 125 g/ha,Portulaca oleracea was added to the controlled spectrum. Digitariasanguinalis could be controlled by the high rate (DINAMIC® at 250g/ha+Galago at 300 mL/ha). No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedthroughout the growing season. DINAMIC® can be applied in combinationwith Galago to give the following control: DINAMIC® at 100 g/ha+Galagoat 150 mL/ha to control Amaranthus hybridus and Commilina benghalensis.DINAMIC® at 125 g/ha+Galago at 150 mL/ha to control Amaranthus hybridus,Commilina benghalensis and Portulaca oleracea. The higher dosage rate(DINAMIC® at 250 g/ha+Galago at 300 mL/ha can be used to control theentire spectrum.

C. Pre Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)as a pre emergence application against weeds in maize (varietyPAN60-445B) was determined.

Trials were conducted at a site with a history of weeds. The trials wereexecuted under moderate weather conditions. Efficacy and visualphytotoxicity assessments were performed in triplicate. Normal practiceswere carried out to control insects and fungi. Crops were provided in 76cm row width, at a sowing rate of 65,000 plants/ha, and at a sowingdepth of five to eight cm. Soil class was clay with a clay content ofabout 28%. The site in this Example had been previously used for soyabeans. Trial design was randomized blocks with a plot size of 20 m²replicated four times. Municipal water was used for all applications(pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-15 was conducted at preemergence stage 3 days after planting seed. Application of thetreatments was conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period,dry bulb temperature was about 20° C., wet bulb temperature was about16° C., relative humidity was about 65%, cloud cover was about 10%, windspeed was about 0 m/s. Treatments were administered with a multi-spraygas sprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80 nozzle. Spacing was 50 cm, with aheight of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, at a ground speed of 1 m/s, and acalibration mean output of 330 L/ha. The soil temperature over theapplication period averaged to about 20° C. and the soil remained moistand fine.

TABKE 6-15 Treatments Dosage rate Dosage rate No Treatments (gai/ha)(g/ha or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG 52.5 75 2DINAMIC ® 700WDG 70 100 3 DINAMIC ® 700WDG 87.5 125 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG105 150 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG 210 300 6 Galago 480SC 48 100 7 Galago 480SC96 200 8 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 48 100 9 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 72 150 10 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago480SC 48 100 11 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC 72 150 12DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 48 100 13 DINAMIC ® 700WDG +87.5 125 Galago 480SC 72 150 14 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 175 250 Galago 480SC144 300

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-16 to 6-18 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover the 6 weeks.

TABLE 6-16 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage3 Leaves BBCH scale 13 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 16 mm

TABLE 6-17 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage5 Leaves BBCH scale 15 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 30 mm

TABLE 6-18 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage8 Leaves BBCH scale 18 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 22 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-19 through 6-21. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-19 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep AMASP ELEIN IPOPU COMBE Untreated control I30 20 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 35 18 28 20 1 DINAMIC ® at I 70 70 60 70 75 g ii 70 70 60 60 iii 7070 60 60 iv 70 60 50 70 Mean 70 68 58 65 2 DINAMIC ® at I 70 70 70 70100 g ii 70 70 60 70 iii 70 70 60 70 iv 70 70 60 70 Mean 70 70 63 70 3DINAMIC ® at I 80 70 70 70 125 g ii 70 80 60 70 iii 80 80 70 70 iv 70 7060 70 Mean 75 75 65 70 4 DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 70 80 150 g ii 80 70 70 70iii 80 70 60 80 iv 80 70 70 70 Mean 80 73 68 75 5 DINAMIC ® at I 90 8090 80 300 g ii 80 80 80 80 iii 80 90 90 80 iv 90 90 90 80 Mean 85 85 8880 6 Galago at I 90 80 80 80 100 ml ii 80 80 80 80 iii 80 70 80 70 iv 9070 80 80 Mean 85 75 80 78 7 Galago at I 100 90 95 90 200 ml ii 100 90 9590 iii 100 95 98 90 iv 100 95 98 90 Mean 100 93 97 90 8 DINAMIC ® at I80 80 70 80 75 g Galago at ii 80 80 70 70 100 ml iii 80 80 70 70 iv 8070 60 80 Mean 80 78 68 75 9 DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 80 80 75 g Galago at ii80 80 70 80 150 ml iii 80 80 70 80 iv 80 80 70 80 Mean 80 80 73 80 10DINAMIC ® at I 90 80 80 80 100 g Galago at ii 80 90 70 80 100 ml iii 9090 80 80 iv 80 80 70 80 Mean 85 85 75 80 11 DINAMIC ® at I 95 90 80 90100 g Galago at ii 95 80 80 80 150 ml iii 95 80 70 90 iv 90 80 80 90Mean 94 83 78 88 12 DINAMIC ® at I 100 95 100 95 125 g Galago at ii 9595 98 90 100 ml iii 95 100 100 90 iv 100 100 100 90 Mean 98 98 100 91 13DINAMIC ® at I 100 90 95 90 125 g Galago at ii 95 90 90 90 150 ml iii 9580 90 80 iv 100 80 95 90 Mean 98 85 93 88 14 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100100 250 g Galago at ii 100 100 100 95 300 ml iii 100 100 98 95 iv 100100 95 90 Mean 100 100 98 95 AMASP = Amaranthus spinosus; COMBE =Commelina benghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; ELEIN = Eleusineindica

TABLE 6-20 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep AMASP ELEIN IPOPU COMBE Untreated control I30 20 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 35 18 28 20 1 DINAMIC ® at I 60 60 50 60 75 g ii 70 60 60 60 iii 6070 60 50 iv 70 60 50 70 Mean 65 63 55 60 2 DINAMIC ® at I 60 60 60 70100 g ii 60 70 50 60 iii 60 60 60 70 iv 70 60 60 60 Mean 63 63 58 65 3DINAMIC ® at I 70 70 70 60 125 g ii 70 80 60 70 iii 70 70 60 70 iv 60 7060 60 Mean 68 73 63 65 4 DINAMIC ® at I 80 70 60 70 150 g ii 80 70 70 70iii 80 60 60 80 iv 80 70 60 70 Mean 80 68 63 73 5 DINAMIC ® at I 90 8090 80 300 g ii 80 80 80 80 iii 80 90 90 70 iv 90 90 90 80 Mean 85 85 8878 6 Galago at I 80 70 70 70 100 ml ii 70 60 70 70 iii 70 60 70 60 iv 7060 70 70 Mean 73 63 70 68 7 Galago at I 90 80 80 80 200 ml ii 90 80 8080 iii 90 90 90 80 iv 90 80 90 80 Mean 90 83 85 80 8 DINAMIC ® at I 7070 60 70 75 g Galago at ii 70 70 60 70 100 ml iii 70 70 70 70 iv 80 7060 80 Mean 73 70 63 73 9 DINAMIC ® at I 70 70 70 80 75 g Galago at ii 7080 70 70 150 ml iii 80 80 60 70 iv 70 70 70 80 Mean 73 75 68 75 10DINAMIC ® at I 80 70 70 70 100 g Galago at ii 80 80 70 80 100 ml iii 8080 70 80 iv 80 80 70 80 Mean 80 78 70 78 11 DINAMIC ® at I 90 80 70 80100 g Galago at ii 90 80 80 70 150 ml iii 95 70 70 80 iv 90 80 70 90Mean 91 78 73 80 12 DINAMIC ® at I 100 90 100 90 125 g Galago at ii 9095 95 90 100 ml iii 95 100 100 90 iv 100 100 100 90 Mean 96 96 99 90 13DINAMIC ® at I 100 80 90 90 125 g Galago at ii 95 90 90 80 150 ml iii 9080 90 80 iv 100 80 90 90 Mean 96 83 90 85 14 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100100 250 g Galago at ii 100 100 100 95 300 ml iii 100 100 95 90 iv 100100 95 90 Mean 100 100 98 94 AMASP = Amaranthus spinosus; COMBE =Commelina benghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; ELEIN = Eleusineindica

TABLE 6-21 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep AMASP ELEIN IPOPU COMBE Untreated control I30 10 30 30 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 10 30 30Mean 35 13 28 25 1 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 50 60 50 50 ii 60 60 60 60 iii 6060 50 50 iv 60 50 50 60 Mean 58 58 53 55 2 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 60 60 6070 ii 60 60 50 60 iii 60 60 60 60 iv 60 60 60 60 Mean 60 60 58 63 3DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 60 60 70 60 ii 70 70 60 70 iii 60 70 50 60 iv 60 7060 60 Mean 63 68 60 63 4 DINAMIC ® at 150 g I 80 60 60 70 ii 70 70 60 70iii 70 60 60 80 iv 80 60 50 70 Mean 75 63 58 73 5 DINAMIC ® at 300 g I80 70 80 70 ii 80 80 80 80 iii 80 80 90 70 iv 90 90 80 80 Mean 83 80 8375 6 Galago at 100 ml I 70 60 70 70 ii 60 60 60 60 iii 70 60 70 60 iv 7060 70 70 Mean 68 60 68 65 7 Galago at 200 ml I 80 80 80 80 ii 90 80 8080 iii 80 90 80 90 iv 90 80 90 80 Mean 85 83 83 83 8 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I70 60 60 70 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 70 50 70 iii 60 70 60 60 iv 70 60 6070 Mean 65 65 58 68 9 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 60 70 70 70 Galago at 150 mlii 70 70 60 70 iii 70 70 50 70 iv 60 60 70 80 Mean 65 68 63 73 10DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 70 70 60 70 Galago at 100 ml ii 70 70 70 70 iii 8080 70 80 iv 70 70 60 80 Mean 73 73 65 75 11 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 7070 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 80 70 70 iii 90 70 60 80 iv 90 80 70 80Mean 88 75 68 78 12 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 98 90 100 90 Galago at 100 mlii 90 90 95 80 iii 90 100 98 90 iv 100 98 98 90 Mean 95 95 98 88 13DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 98 80 90 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 95 90 95 80 iii 9080 95 80 iv 98 90 90 90 Mean 95 85 93 85 14 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 100 100100 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 98 iii 100 100 95 90 iv 100 10090 80 Mean 100 100 96 92 AMASP = Amaranthus spinosus; COMBE = Commelinabenghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; ELEIN = Eleusine indica

DINAMIC® 700WDG at 300 g/ha showed satisfactory control of Amaranthusspinosus, Eleusine indica and Ipomoea purpurea but could not controlCommilina benghalensis. Galago 480SC at 200 mL/ha showed sufficient ofthe entire weed spectrum. The combinations at the higher dosage ratesresulted in excellent control. DINAMIC® at 125 g/ha+Galago at 100 mL/hashowed good control over the entire weed spectrum. No visual signs ofphytotoxicity were noticed throughout the growing season. DINAMIC® at300 g/ha alone or Galago 480SC at 200 mL/ha can be used to controlAmaranthus spinosus, Eleusine indica and Ipomoea purpurea. DINAMIC® at125 g/ha+Galago at 100 mL/ha can be used to control Amaranthus spinosus,Eleusine indica, Ipomoea purpurea and Commilina benghalensis.

D. Pre Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)or TOLLA 840 S (available from Volanco Agroscience, Mt. Edgecombe, SouthAfrica) as a pre emergence application against weeds in maize (varietyPHI 2369W) was determined.

Trials were conducted at a site with a history of weeds. The trials wereexecuted under moderate weather conditions. Efficacy and visualphytotoxicity assessments were performed in triplicate. Normal practiceswere carried out to control insects and fungi. Crops were provided in 55cm row width, at a sowing rate of 65,000 plants/ha, and at a sowingdepth of five to eight cm. Soil class was clay with a clay content ofabout 40%. The site in this Example had been previously used for maize.Trial design was randomized blocks with a plot size of 20 m² replicatedfour times. Municipal water was used for all applications (pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-22 was conducted at preemergence stage 1 day after planting seed. Application of the treatmentswas conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period, dry bulbtemperature was about 26° C., wet bulb temperature was about 16° C.,relative humidity was about 65%-70%, cloud cover was about 100%, andwind speed was about 1 m/s out of the east. Treatments were administeredwith a multi-spray gas sprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80 nozzle. Spacingwas 50 cm, with a height of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, at a ground speedof 1 m/s, and a calibration mean output of 330 L/ha. The soiltemperature over the application period averaged to about 28° C. and thesoil remained moist and fine.

TABLE 6-22 Treatments Dosage rate Dosage rate No Treatments (gai/ha)(g/ha or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75Galago 480SC 48 100 2 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 72 150 3DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC 48 100 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70100 Galago 480SC 72 150 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 48100 6 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 72 150 7 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 8 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 9 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 10 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 11 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 12 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 13 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 175 250 Galago 480SC + 144 300 TOLLA 840S 840 2000 14CALLISTO ® 480SC + 124.8 260 DUAL S GOLD ® 915EC 649.7 710

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-23 to 6-25 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover the 6 weeks.

TABLE 6-23 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage4 Leaves BBCH scale 14 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 28 mm

TABLE 6-24 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage6 Leaves BBCH scale 16 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 6 mm

TABLE 6-25 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage8 Leaves BBCH scale 18 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 23 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-26 through 6-28. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-26 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTEX IPOPU AMAHY Untreated control I 30 4030 % soil cover ii 40 30 30 iii 40 40 20 iv 30 40 30 Mean 35 38 28 1DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 60 80 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 70 80 iii 60 80 70iv 60 80 70 Mean 60 78 75 2 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 80 90 Galago at 150ml ii 80 80 80 iii 80 90 80 iv 80 80 90 Mean 78 83 85 3 DINAMIC ® at 100g I 50 80 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 90 80 iii 70 80 80 iv 70 80 80 Mean63 83 80 4 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 70 80 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 70 90 80iii 80 90 90 iv 70 80 90 Mean 73 85 88 5 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 70 90 95Galago at 100 ml ii 70 80 95 iii 60 90 100 iv 70 90 90 Mean 68 88 95 6DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 90 100 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 80 100 100 iii 80 90100 iv 80 95 100 Mean 83 96 100 7 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 80 90 95 Galago at100 ml ii 80 90 95 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 80 80 95 iv 70 90 98 Mean 78 8896 8 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 80 90 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 80 90 100 TOLLAat 1000 ml iii 80 90 100 iv 80 95 100 Mean 80 91 100 9 DINAMIC ® at 100g I 90 95 100 Galago at 100 ml ii 80 95 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 80 95100 iv 90 90 100 Mean 85 94 100 10 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 90 95 100 Galagoat 150 ml ii 90 95 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 90 98 100 iv 80 95 100 Mean88 96 100 11 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 80 98 100 Galago at 100 ml ii 90 95100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 80 95 100 iv 90 98 100 Mean 85 97 100 12DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 90 100 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 95 100 TOLLA at1000 ml iii 80 100 100 iv 90 98 100 Mean 88 98 100 13 DINAMIC ® at 250 gI 95 100 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 TOLLA at 2000 ml iii 100100 100 iv 98 100 100 Mean 98 100 100 14 Calisto at 260 ml I 80 95 100DUAL S GOLD ® at 710 ml ii 80 95 100 iii 80 100 100 iv 70 95 100 Mean 7896 100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; AMAHY =Amaranthus hybridus

TABLE 6-27 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTEX IPOPU AMAHY Untreated control I 30 4030 % soil cover ii 40 30 30 iii 40 40 20 iv 30 40 30 Mean 35 38 28 1DINAMIC ® at I 50 70 70 75 g ii 50 60 70 Galago at 100 ml iii 50 70 60iv 50 70 60 Mean 50 68 65 2 DINAMIC ® at I 70 70 80 75 g ii 70 70 70Galago at 150 ml iii 80 80 70 iv 70 70 80 Mean 73 73 75 3 DINAMIC ® at I50 70 70 100 g ii 60 80 70 Galago at 100 ml iii 60 70 70 iv 60 70 70Mean 58 73 70 4 DINAMIC ® at I 60 70 80 100 g ii 70 80 70 Galago at 150ml iii 70 80 80 iv 70 70 80 Mean 68 75 78 5 DINAMIC ® at I 70 80 90 125g ii 60 80 90 Galago at 100 ml iii 60 90 100 iv 70 90 90 Mean 65 85 93 6DINAMIC ® at I 90 100 100 125 g ii 70 98 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 70 90100 iv 80 95 100 Mean 78 96 100 7 DINAMIC ® at I 80 90 95 75 g ii 70 8090 Galago at 100 ml iii 80 80 95 TOLLA at 1000 ml iv 60 80 98 Mean 73 8395 8 DINAMIC ® at I 70 90 100 75 g ii 80 90 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 8090 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iv 70 90 100 Mean 75 90 100 9 DINAMIC ® at I 8090 100 100 g ii 80 90 100 Galago at 100 ml iii 80 90 100 TOLLA at 1000ml iv 80 90 100 Mean 80 90 100 10 DINAMIC ® at I 90 90 100 100 g ii 8090 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 90 95 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iv 80 95 100 Mean85 93 100 11 DINAMIC ® at I 80 95 100 125 g ii 80 90 100 Galago at 100ml iii 70 90 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iv 90 95 100 Mean 80 93 100 12DINAMIC ® at I 90 98 100 125 g ii 80 95 100 Galaao at 150 ml iii 80 98100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iv 90 98 100 Mean 85 97 100 13 DINAMIC ® at I 95100 100 250 g ii 98 100 100 Galago at 300 ml iii 100 100 100 TOLLA at2000 ml iv 95 100 100 Mean 97 100 100 14 Calisto at 260 ml I 80 95 100DUAL S GOLD ® ii 70 90 100 at 710 ml iii 80 98 100 iv 70 95 100 Mean 7595 100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; AMAHY =Amaranthus hybridus

TABLE 6-28 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTEX IPOPU AMAHY Untreated control I 30 4030 % soil cover ii 40 30 30 iii 40 40 20 iv 30 40 30 Mean 35 38 28 1DINAMIC ® at I 50 70 60 75 g ii 50 60 70 Galago at 100 ml iii 50 60 60iv 50 70 60 Mean 50 65 63 2 DINAMIC ® at I 70 70 80 75 g ii 70 70 70Galago at 150 ml iii 70 80 70 iv 70 70 80 Mean 70 73 75 3 DINAMIC ® at I50 70 80 100 g ii 50 70 70 Galago at 100 ml iii 50 70 70 iv 60 70 80Mean 53 70 75 4 DINAMIC ® at I 60 70 80 100 g ii 60 80 70 Galago at 150ml iii 60 70 80 iv 70 70 70 Mean 63 73 75 5 DINAMIC ® at I 60 70 90 125g ii 60 80 90 Galago at 100 ml iii 60 90 100 iv 60 80 90 Mean 60 80 93 6DINAMIC ® at I 80 100 100 125 g ii 70 95 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 70 90100 iv 80 95 100 Mean 75 95 100 7 DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 90 75 g ii 70 8090 Galago at 100 ml iii 70 80 95 TOLLA at 1000 ml iv 60 80 98 Mean 70 8093 8 DINAMIC ® at I 70 90 100 75 g ii 70 90 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 8090 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iv 70 80 100 Mean 73 88 100 9 DINAMIC ® at I 7090 100 100 g ii 80 80 100 Galago at 100 ml iii 80 80 100 TOLLA at 1000ml iv 70 90 100 Mean 75 85 100 10 DINAMIC ® at I 80 90 100 100 g ii 8090 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 90 95 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iv 80 90 100 Mean83 91 100 11 DINAMIC ® at I 70 95 100 125 g ii 80 90 100 Galago at 100ml iii 70 90 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iv 80 90 100 Mean 75 91 100 12DINAMIC ® at I 90 95 100 125 g ii 80 95 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 80 95100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iv 80 98 100 Mean 83 96 100 13 DINAMIC ® at I 95100 100 250 g ii 95 100 100 Galago at 300 ml iii 100 100 100 TOLLA at2000 ml iv 95 100 100 Mean 96 100 100 14 Calisto at 260 ml I 80 90 100DUAL S GOLD ® ii 70 90 100 at 710 ml iii 80 95 100 iv 70 95 100 Mean 7593 100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; AMAHY =Amaranthus hybridus

DINAMIC® 700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha showedsatisfactory control of Amaranthus hybridus and marginal control ofIpomoea purpurea but Rottboellia exaltata was insufficiently controlledeven by the higher rate of Galago 480SC (150 mL/ha). The higher rate ofthis combination (DINAMIC® 700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha)performed on par with the standard CALLISTO® at 260 mL/ha+DUAL S GOLD®at 710 mL/ha. The addition of TOLLA showed a significant improvement toefficacy of the DINAMIC®+Galago mixture. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha+TOLLA 840S at 1000 mL/ha resulted insatisfactory control of Amaranthus hybridus and marginal control ofIpomoea purpurea. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 100 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150mL/ha+TOLLA 840S at 1000 mL/ha compared with the standard CALLISTO® at260 mL/ha+DUAL S GOLD® at 710 mL/ha. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago480SC at 150 mL/ha+TOLLA 840S at 1000 mL/ha resulted in satisfactorycontrol of Rottboellia exaltata which could not be achieved by thestandard CALLISTO® at 260 mL/ha+DUAL S GOLD® at 710 mL/ha. DINAMIC®700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha can be used to controlAmaranthus hybridus and Ipomoea purpurea. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha+TOLLA 840S at 1000 mL/ha can be used tocontrol Amaranthus hybridus and Ipomoea purpurea. To control Rottboelliaexaltata DINAMIC® 700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha+TOLLA840S at 1000 mL/ha can be used.

E. Pre Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)or TOLLA 840 S (available from Volanco Agroscience, Mt. Edgecombe, SouthAfrica) as a pre emergence application against weeds in maize (varietyPHI 32Y85) was determined. A comparison with CALLISTO® 480SC plus DUAL SGOLD® 915EC (both available from Syngenta, Greensboro, N.C.) wasperformed.

Trials were conducted at a site with a history of weeds. The trials wereexecuted under moderate weather conditions. Efficacy and visualphytotoxicity assessments were performed in triplicate. Normal practiceswere carried out to control insects and fungi. Crops were provided in 76cm row width, at a sowing rate of 65,000 plants/ha, and at a sowingdepth of five to eight cm. Soil class was clay with a clay content ofabout 35%. The site in this Example had been previously used for soyabeans. Trial design was randomized blocks with a plot size of 20 m²replicated four times. Municipal water was used for all applications(pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-29 was conducted at preemergence stage 1 day after planting seed. Application of the treatmentswas conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period, dry bulbtemperature was about 26° C., wet bulb temperature was about 23° C.,relative humidity was about 70%, cloud cover was about 50%, and windspeed was about 0 m/s. Treatments were administered with a multi-spraygas sprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80 nozzle. Spacing was 50 cm, with aheight of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, at a ground speed of 1 m/s, and acalibration mean output of 330 L/ha. The soil temperature over theapplication period averaged to about 24° C. and the soil remained moistand fine.

TABLE 6-29 Treatments Dosage rate Dosage rate No Treatments (gai/ha)(g/ha or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75Galago 480SC 48 100 2 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 72 150 3DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC 48 100 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70100 Galago 480SC 72 150 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 48100 6 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 72 150 7 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 8 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 9 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 10 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 11 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 12 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 13 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 175 250 Galago 480SC + 144 300 TOLLA 840S 840 2000 14CALLISTO ® 480SC + 124.8 260 DUAL S GOLD ® 915EC 649.7 710

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-23 to 6-25 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover the 6 weeks.

TABLE 6-30 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage3-4 Leaves BBCH scale 13 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 0 mm

TABLE 6-31 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage6 Leaves BBCH scale 16 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 18 mm

TABLE 6-32 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage8 leaves BBCH scale: 18 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 12 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-33 through 6-35. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-33 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I30 20 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 35 18 28 20 1 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 60 70 70 Galago at 100 ml ii80 70 90 90 iii 80 70 90 80 iv 70 60 80 80 Mean 75 65 83 80 2 DINAMIC ®at 75 g I 80 70 70 70 Galago at 150 ml ii 80 70 90 70 iii 70 80 90 80 iv70 70 90 80 Mean 75 73 85 75 3 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 70 70 80 80 Galagoat 100 ml ii 80 80 90 90 iii 80 70 95 80 iv 80 70 90 80 Mean 78 73 89 834 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 80 95 95 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 80 90 95 iii80 80 95 90 iv 90 70 95 95 Mean 85 78 94 94 5 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 80 7090 90 Galago at 100 ml ii 80 80 90 80 iii 80 70 98 90 iv 80 70 95 95Mean 80 73 93 89 6 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 90 90 95 90 Galago at 150 ml ii80 90 100 70 iii 90 90 95 80 iv 80 80 100 90 Mean 85 88 98 83 7DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 95 70 95 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 90 70 90 90 TOLLA at1000 ml iii 90 70 90 95 iv 90 70 95 90 Mean 91 70 93 89 8 DINAMIC ® at75 g I 100 70 80 98 Galago at 150 ml ii 95 80 95 90 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii95 70 90 95 iv 100 80 90 90 Mean 98 75 89 93 9 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 9590 90 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 95 80 90 95 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 90 10090 iv 100 90 90 100 Mean 98 88 93 95 10 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 100 9080 Galago at 150 ml ii 98 100 100 95 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 100 90iv 95 100 95 95 Mean 98 100 96 90 11 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 90 95Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 100 98 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 95 100 95 90 iv98 100 100 100 Mean 98 100 96 96 12 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 90 80Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 90 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 100 90iv 100 100 100 90 Mean 100 100 98 88 13 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 100 100 10090 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA at 2000 ml iii 100 100 90100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 98 98 14 Calisto at 260 ml I 100 9090 90 DUAL S GOLD ® ii 100 90 95 95 at 710 ml iii 100 80 100 90 iv 10090 100 95 Mean 100 88 96 93 DIGSA = Digitaria sanguinalis; POROL =Portulaca oleracea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus; COMBE = Commelinabenghalensis

TABLE 6-34 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I30 20 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 35 18 28 20 1 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 70 60 70 Galago at 100 ml ii70 70 60 70 iii 70 70 70 70 iv 80 70 60 80 Mean 73 70 63 73 2 DINAMIC ®at 75 g I 70 70 70 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 70 80 70 70 iii 80 80 60 70 iv70 70 70 80 Mean 73 75 68 75 3 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 70 70 70 Galagoat 100 ml ii 80 80 70 80 iii 80 80 70 80 iv 80 80 70 80 Mean 80 78 70 784 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 90 80 70 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 80 80 70 iii95 70 70 80 iv 90 80 70 90 Mean 91 78 73 80 5 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 10090 100 90 Galago at 100 ml ii 90 95 95 90 iii 95 100 100 90 iv 100 100100 90 Mean 96 96 99 90 6 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 80 90 90 Galago at150 ml ii 95 90 90 80 iii 90 80 90 80 iv 100 80 90 90 Mean 96 83 90 85 7DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 80 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 70 95TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 80 98 iv 100 100 80 95 Mean 100 100 78 96 8DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 80 100 Galago al 150 ml ii 98 100 80 98TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 80 100 iv 100 100 80 98 Mean 100 100 80 999 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 100 95 98 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 80 98TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 90 95 iv 100 100 80 100 Mean 100 100 86 9810 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 100 80 95 Galago at 150 ml ii 98 100 90 98TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 80 98 iv 100 100 80 100 Mean 100 100 83 9811 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 98 100 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 100100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 95 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 10098 100 12 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 98 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 100100 100 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 100 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean100 100 100 100 13 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 100 100 100 100 Galago at 300 mlii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA at 2000 ml iii 100 100 100 100 iv 100 100 100100 Mean 100 100 100 100 14 Calisto at 260 ml I 100 100 100 100 DUAL SGOLD ® ii 100 100 100 100 at 710 ml iii 100 100 95 100 iv 100 100 90 100Mean 100 100 96 100 DIGSA = Digitaria sanguinalis; POROL = Portulacaoleracea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus; COMBE = Commelina benghalensis

TABLE 6-35 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I30 20 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 35 18 28 20 1 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 60 60 70 Galago at 100 ml ii60 70 50 70 iii 60 70 60 60 iv 70 60 60 70 Mean 65 65 58 68 2 DINAMIC ®at 75 g I 60 70 70 70 Galago at 150 ml ii 70 70 60 70 iii 70 70 50 70 iv60 60 70 80 Mean 65 68 63 73 3 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 70 70 60 70 Galagoat 100 ml ii 70 70 70 70 iii 80 80 70 80 iv 70 70 60 80 Mean 73 73 65 754 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 70 70 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 80 70 70 iii90 70 60 80 iv 90 80 70 80 Mean 88 75 68 78 5 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 98 90100 90 Galago at 100 ml ii 90 90 95 80 iii 90 100 98 90 iv 100 98 98 90Mean 95 95 98 88 6 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 98 80 90 90 Galago at 150 ml ii95 90 95 80 iii 90 80 95 80 iv 98 90 90 90 Mean 95 85 93 85 7 DINAMIC ®at 75 g I 100 100 70 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 60 90 TOLLA at 1000ml iii 100 100 70 95 iv 100 100 70 95 Mean 100 100 68 94 8 DINAMIC ® at75 g I 100 100 70 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 80 100 TOLLA at 1000ml iii 100 100 70 100 iv 100 100 70 98 Mean 100 100 73 100 9 DINAMIC ®at 100 g I 100 100 90 100 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 80 100 TOLLA at1000 ml iii 100 100 80 98 iv 100 100 80 100 Mean 100 100 83 100 10DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 100 80 98 Galago at 150 ml ii 98 100 90 100TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 90 100 iv 100 100 80 100 Mean 100 100 85100 11 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 100 100 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100100 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 98 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100100 100 100 12 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 100 100 Galago at 150 ml ii100 100 100 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 100 100 iv 100 100 100 100Mean 100 100 100 100 13 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 100 100 100 100 Galago at300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA at 2000 ml iii 100 100 100 100 iv 100100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 14 Calisto at 260 ml I 100 100 100 100DUAL S GOLD ® ii 100 100 100 100 at 710 ml iii 100 100 95 100 iv 100 10095 100 Mean 100 100 98 100 DIGSA = Digitaria sanguinalis; POROL =Portulaca oleracea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus; COMBE = Commelinabenghalensis

DINAMIC® 700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha showedsatisfactory control of Digitaria sanguinalis, Portulaca oleracea,Amaranthus hybridus and Commilina benghalensis. This combinationcompared favorably with the standard CALLISTO® at 260 mL/ha+DUAL S GOLD®at 710 mL/ha. The addition of TOLLA improved the efficacy of theDINAMIC®+Galago mixture. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 100 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100mL/ha+TOLLA 840S at 1000 mL/ha resulted in 100% control of Digitariasanguinalis, Portulaca oleracea and Commilina benghalensis, andsatisfactory control of Amaranthus hybridus. This combination comparedfavorably with the standard CALLISTO® at 260 mL/ha+DUAL S GOLD® at 710mL/ha. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticed throughout thegrowing season. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/hacan be used to control Digitaria sanguinalis, Portulaca oleracea,Amaranthus hybridus and Commilina benghalensis. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 100g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha+TOLLA 840S at 1000 mL/ha can be used tocontrol Digitaria sanguinalis, Portulaca oleracea, Amaranthus hybridusand Commilina benghalensis.

F. Pre Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)or TOLLA 840 S (available from Volanco Agroscience, Mt. Edgecombe, SouthAfrica) as a pre emergence application against weeds in maize (varietyPAN60-445B) was determined. A comparison with CALLISTO® 480SC plus DUALS GOLD® 915EC (both available from Syngenta, Greensboro, N.C.) wasperformed.

Trials were conducted at a site with a history of weeds. The trials wereexecuted under moderate weather conditions. Efficacy and visualphytotoxicity assessments were performed in triplicate. Normal practiceswere carried out to control insects and fungi. Crops were provided in 76cm row width, at a sowing rate of 65,000 plants/ha, and at a sowingdepth of five to eight cm. Soil class was clay with a clay content ofabout 28%. The site in this Example had been previously used for soyabeans. Trial design was randomized blocks with a plot size of 20 m²replicated four times. Municipal water was used for all applications(pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-29 was conducted at preemergence stage 3 days after planting seed. Application of thetreatments was conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period,dry bulb temperature was about 22° C., wet bulb temperature was about18° C., relative humidity was about 65%, cloud cover was about 30%, andwind speed was about 0 m/s. Treatments were administered with amulti-spray gas sprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80 nozzle. Spacing was 50cm, with a height of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, at a ground speed of 1m/s, and a calibration mean output of 330 L/ha. The soil temperatureover the application period averaged to about 22° C. and the soilremained moist and fine.

TABLE 6-36 Treatments Dosage rate Dosage rate No Treatments (gai/ha)(g/ha or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75Galago 480SC 48 100 2 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 72 150 3DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC 48 100 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70100 Galago 480SC 72 150 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 48100 6 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 72 150 7 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 8 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 9 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 10 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 11 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 12 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 840S 840 1000 13 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 175 250 Galago 480SC + 144 300 TOLLA 840S 840 2000 14CALLISTO ® 480SC + 124.8 260 DUAL S GOLD ® 915EC 649.7 710

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-37 to 6-39 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover the 6 weeks.

TABLE 6-37 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage3 Leaves BBCH scale 13 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 16 mm

TABLE 6-38 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage5 Leaves BBCH scale 15 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 1 30 mm

TABLE 6-39 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage8 leaves BBCH scale: 18 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 22 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-40 through 6-42. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-40 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep AMASP ELEIN IPOPU COMBE Untreated control I30 20 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 35 18 28 20 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 80 80 70 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 8080 70 70 iii 80 80 70 70 iv 80 70 60 80 Mean 80 78 68 75 DINAMIC ® at 75g I 80 80 80 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 80 80 70 80 iii 80 80 70 80 iv 80 8070 80 Mean 80 80 73 80 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 90 80 80 80 Galago at 100 mlii 80 90 70 80 iii 90 90 80 80 iv 80 80 70 80 Mean 85 85 75 80 DINAMIC ®at 100 g I 95 90 80 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 95 80 80 80 iii 95 80 70 90iv 90 80 80 90 Mean 94 83 78 88 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 95 100 95Galago at 100 ml ii 95 95 98 90 iii 95 100 100 90 iv 100 100 100 90 Mean98 98 100 91 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 90 95 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 95 9090 90 iii 95 80 90 80 iv 100 80 95 90 Mean 98 85 93 88 DINAMIC ® at 75 gI 100 100 90 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 80 95 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii100 98 80 100 iv 100 100 90 95 Mean 100 100 85 96 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I100 100 90 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 98 100 90 98 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100100 90 98 iv 100 100 90 98 Mean 100 100 90 99 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100100 100 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 90 98 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100100 90 98 iv 100 100 95 100 Mean 100 100 94 98 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 98100 90 95 Galago at 150 ml ii 98 100 90 95 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 10090 100 iv 100 100 90 100 Mean 99 100 90 98 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 10095 100 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 98 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 10095 100 iv 100 100 98 100 Mean 100 100 97 100 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100100 95 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 98 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100100 98 100 iv 100 100 98 100 Mean 100 100 97 100 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I100 100 100 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA at 2000 ml iii100 100 100 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 Calisto at 260ml I 100 100 100 100 DUAL S GOLD ® at ii 100 100 100 100 710 ml iii 100100 90 100 iv 100 100 90 100 Mean 100 100 95 100 AMASP = Amaranthusspinosus; COMBE = Commelina benghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea;ELEIN = Eleusine indica

TABLE 6-41 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep AMASP ELEIN IPOPU COMBE Untreated control I30 20 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 35 18 28 20 1 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 70 60 70 Galago at 100 ml ii70 70 60 70 iii 70 70 70 70 iv 80 70 60 80 Mean 73 70 63 73 2 DINAMIC ®at 75 g I 70 70 70 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 70 80 70 70 iii 80 80 60 70 iv70 70 70 80 Mean 73 75 68 75 3 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 70 70 70 Galagoat 100 ml ii 80 80 70 80 iii 80 80 70 80 iv 80 80 70 80 Mean 80 78 70 784 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 90 80 70 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 80 80 70 iii95 70 70 80 iv 90 80 70 90 Mean 91 78 73 80 5 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 10090 100 90 Galago at 100 ml ii 90 95 95 90 iii 95 100 100 90 iv 100 100100 90 Mean 96 96 99 90 6 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 80 90 90 Galago at150 ml ii 95 90 90 80 iii 90 80 90 80 iv 100 80 90 90 Mean 96 83 90 85 7DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 80 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 70 95TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 80 98 iv 100 100 80 95 Mean 100 100 78 96 8DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 80 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 98 100 80 98TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 80 100 iv 100 100 80 98 Mean 100 100 80 999 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 100 95 98 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 80 98TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 90 95 iv 100 100 80 100 Mean 100 100 86 9810 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 100 80 95 Galago at 150 ml ii 98 100 90 98TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 80 98 iv 100 100 80 100 Mean 100 100 83 9811 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 98 100 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 100100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 95 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 10098 100 12 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 98 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 100100 100 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 100 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean100 100 100 100 13 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 100 100 100 100 Galago at 300 mlii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA at 2000 ml iii 100 100 100 100 iv 100 100 100100 Mean 100 100 100 100 14 Calisto at 260 ml I 100 100 100 100 DUAL SGOLD ® ii 100 100 100 100 at 710 ml iii 100 100 95 100 iv 100 100 90 100Mean 100 100 96 100 AMASP = Amaranthus spinosus; COMBE = Commelinabenghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; ELEIN = Eleusine indica

TABLE 6-42 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application) iii 4020 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20 Mean 35 18 28 20 1 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 60 6070 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 70 50 70 iii 60 70 60 60 iv 70 60 60 70 Mean65 65 58 68 2 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 60 70 70 70 Galago at 150 ml ii 70 7060 70 iii 70 70 50 70 iv 60 60 70 80 Mean 65 68 63 73 3 DINAMIC ® at 100g I 70 70 60 70 Galago at 100 ml ii 70 70 70 70 iii 80 80 70 80 iv 70 7060 80 Mean 73 73 65 75 4 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 70 70 80 Galago at 150ml ii 90 80 70 70 iii 90 70 60 80 iv 90 80 70 80 Mean 88 75 68 78 5DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 98 90 100 90 Galago at 100 ml ii 90 90 95 80 iii 90100 98 90 iv 100 98 98 90 Mean 95 95 98 88 6 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 98 8090 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 95 90 95 80 iii 90 80 95 80 iv 98 90 90 90Mean 95 85 93 85 7 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 70 95 Galago at 100 ml ii100 100 60 90 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 70 95 iv 100 100 70 95 Mean100 100 68 94 8 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 70 100 Galago at 150 ml ii100 100 80 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 70 100 iv 100 100 70 98 Mean100 100 73 100 9 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 100 90 100 Galago at 100 ml ii100 100 80 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 80 98 iv 100 100 80 100 Mean100 100 83 100 10 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 100 80 98 Galago at 150 ml ii98 100 90 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 90 100 iv 100 100 80 100 Mean100 100 85 100 11 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 100 100 Galago at 100 mlii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 98 100 iv 100 100 100100 Mean 100 100 100 100 12 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 100 100 Galagoat 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA at 1000 ml iii 100 100 100 100 iv 100100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 13 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 100 100 100 100Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA at 2000 ml iii 100 100 100 100iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 14 Calisto at 260 ml I 100 100100 100 DUAL S GOLD ® ii 100 100 100 100 at 710 ml iii 100 100 95 100 iv100 100 95 100 Mean 100 100 98 100 AMASP = Amaranthus spinosus; COMBE =Commelina benghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea ELEIN = Eleusine indica

DINAMIC® 700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha showedsatisfactory control of Amaranthus spinosus, Eleusine indica, Ipomoeapurpurea and Commilina benghalensis. The addition of TOLLA to the abovemixture appears to be a good practice. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago480SC at 100 mL/ha+TOLLA 840S at 1000 mL/ha performed excellently onAmaranthus spinosus, Eleusine indica and Commilina benghalensis. Howeverto control Ipomoea purpurea the dosage rate of DINAMIC® has to beincreased from 75 g/ha to 100 g/ha—this combination compared with thestandard CALLISTO® at 260 mL/ha+DUAL S GOLD® at 710 mL/ha. No visualsigns of phytotoxicity were noticed throughout the growing season.DINAMIC® 700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha can be used tocontrol Amaranthus spinosus, Eleusine indica, Ipomoea purpurea andCommilina benghalensis. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100mL/ha+TOLLA 840S at 1000 mL/ha can be used to control Amaranthusspinosus, Eleusine indica, Ipomoea purpurea and Commilina benghalensis.

G. Post Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)with or without Wet-All (available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) as a post emergence application against weeds inmaize (variety PHI 2369W) was determined.

Trials were conducted at a site with a history of weeds. The trials wereexecuted under moderate weather conditions. Efficacy and visualphytotoxicity assessments were performed in triplicate. Normal practiceswere carried out to control insects and fungi. Crops were provided in 55cm row width, at a sowing rate of 65,000 plants/ha, and at a sowingdepth of five to eight cm. Soil class was clay with a clay content ofabout 40%. The site in this Example had been previously used for maize.Trial design was randomized blocks with a plot size of 20 m² replicatedfour times. Municipal water was used for all applications (pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-43 was conducted at postemergence stage 15 days after planting. Application of the treatmentswas conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period, dry bulbtemperature was about 30° C., wet bulb temperature was about 24° C.,relative humidity was about 55%, cloud cover was about 0%, and windspeed was about 0 m/s. Treatments were administered with a multi-spraygas sprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80 nozzle. Spacing was 50 cm, with aheight of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, at a ground speed of 1 m/s, and acalibration mean output of 330 L/ha. The soil temperature over theapplication period averaged to about 29° C. and the soil remained moistand fine. Crops stage at the outset was about 4 leaves with a BBCH scaleof 14. Crop and weeds were actively growing. Weed stage was about 3-5leaves.

TABLE 6-43 Treatments Dosage rate Dosage rate No Treatments (gai/ha)(g/ha or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75Galago 480SC 48 100 2 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 72 150 3DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC 48 100 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70100 Galago 480SC 72 150 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 48100 6 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 72 150 7 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 175 250 Galago 480SC + 144 300 Wet-All 8 DINAMIC ® 700WDG +52.5 75 Galago 480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 9 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.575 Galago 480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 10 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100Galago 480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 11 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 12 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 13 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 14 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 175 250 Galago480SC + 144 300 Wet-All — 0.1%

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-44 to 6-46 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover the first 2 weeks. Signs of phytoxicity were noticed in treatment14 at 4 week assessment. Signs of phytotoxicity were noticed intreatment 13 at 6 weeks.

TABLE 6-44 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage5-6 Leaves BBCH scale 15-16 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 18mm

TABLE 6-45 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage8 Leaves BBCH scale 18 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 38 mm

TABLE 6-46 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage10 leaves BBCH scale: 20 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 0 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-47 through 6-49. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-47 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTEX IPOPU AMAHY Untreated control I 50 2030 % soil cover ii 40 10 50 iii 40 20 40 iv 30 20 50 Mean 40 18 43 1DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 50 60 60 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 60 70 iii 60 70 80iv 60 60 70 Mean 58 63 70 2 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 70 70 Galago at 150ml ii 80 70 80 iii 80 70 80 iv 70 70 70 Mean 75 70 75 3 DINAMIC ® at 100g I 50 50 70 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 60 70 iii 70 60 70 iv 60 70 70 Mean60 60 70 4 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 70 70 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 70 80 90iii 70 80 80 iv 70 80 90 Mean 70 78 88 5 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 60 70 90Galago at 100 ml ii 60 80 90 iii 70 80 95 iv 80 70 90 Mean 68 75 91 6DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 80 90 95 Galago at 150 ml ii 60 90 95 iii 70 90 95iv 80 90 95 Mean 73 90 95 7 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 80 95 100 Galago at 300ml ii 90 95 100 iii 90 98 100 iv 90 98 100 Mean 88 97 100 8 DINAMIC ® at75 g I 60 80 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 70 70 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 70 7080 iv 60 70 80 Mean 63 73 78 9 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 80 80 Galago at150 ml ii 80 70 80 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 80 80 80 iv 70 70 80 Mean 75 7580 10 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 60 70 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 70 70 80 Wet-Allat 0.1% iii 60 70 80 iv 70 70 80 Mean 65 70 80 11 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I80 80 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 80 80 90 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 80 90 95 iv 8080 90 Mean 80 83 91 12 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 70 80 95 Galago at 100 ml ii70 80 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 80 80 98 iv 70 80 95 Mean 73 80 96 13DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 70 90 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 80 90 100 Wet-All at0.1% iii 80 90 100 iv 80 80 100 Mean 78 88 100 14 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I90 100 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 90 95 100 Wet-All at 0.2% iii 95 95 100iv 90 95 100 Mean 91 96 100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPU = Ipomoeapurpurea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus

TABLE 6-48 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTEX IPOPU AMAHY Untreated control I 40 2040 % soil cover ii 40 20 40 iii 40 30 30 iv 30 20 50 Mean 38 23 40DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 50 70 60 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 60 70 iii 50 70 80iv 60 60 70 Mean 55 65 70 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 80 70 70 Galago at 150 mlii 80 70 80 iii 80 70 80 iv 70 70 70 Mean 78 70 75 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I60 60 70 Galago at 100 ml ii 70 70 70 iii 70 60 70 iv 60 70 70 Mean 6565 70 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 80 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 70 90 90 iii 7080 80 iv 80 80 90 Mean 75 83 88 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 60 80 90 Galago at100 ml ii 70 80 90 iii 70 80 95 iv 80 80 90 Mean 70 80 91 DINAMIC ® at125 g I 80 90 95 Galago at 150 ml ii 70 95 95 iii 80 95 95 iv 80 90 95Mean 78 93 95 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 90 98 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 90 100100 iii 95 100 100 iv 90 100 100 Mean 91 100 100 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 6080 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 70 70 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 70 80 80 iv 60 7080 Mean 63 75 78 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 80 80 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 80 8080 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 80 80 80 iv 80 80 80 Mean 80 80 80 DINAMIC ® at100 g I 70 70 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 70 80 80 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 70 8080 iv 70 70 80 Mean 70 75 80 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 90 90 Galago at 150ml ii 80 90 90 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 80 90 95 iv 80 90 90 Mean 80 90 91DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 70 80 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 80 90 95 Wet-All at0.1% iii 80 90 98 iv 70 90 95 Mean 75 88 96 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 80 100100 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 90 100 100 iv 8095 100 Mean 85 99 100 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 95 100 100 Galago at 300 mlii 95 100 100 Wet-All at 0.2% iii 98 100 100 iv 95 100 100 Mean 96 100100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; AMAHY =Amaranthus hybridus

TABLE 6-49 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTEX IPOPU AMAHY Untreated control I 40 2040 % soil cover ii 40 20 40 iii 40 30 30 iv 30 20 50 Mean 38 23 40DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 50 70 60 Galago at 100 ml ii 50 70 70 iii 50 70 70iv 60 70 70 Mean 53 70 68 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 80 70 70 Galago at 150 mlii 70 70 80 iii 80 80 80 iv 70 80 70 Mean 75 75 75 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I70 70 70 Galago at 100 ml ii 70 70 95 iii 70 70 70 iv 60 80 70 Mean 6873 76 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 90 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 80 90 90 iii 7090 95 iv 80 80 90 Mean 78 88 91 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 70 80 90 Galago at100 ml ii 70 80 90 iii 70 80 90 iv 70 80 90 Mean 70 80 90 DINAMIC ® at125 g I 80 90 95 Galago at 150 ml ii 80 98 98 iii 80 95 95 iv 80 95 100Mean 80 95 97 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 90 100 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 95 100100 iii 95 100 100 iv 90 100 100 Mean 93 100 100 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 6080 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 60 70 70 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 60 80 80 iv 60 7080 Mean 60 75 78 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 80 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 80 9090 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 80 80 80 iv 70 80 90 Mean 75 83 85 DINAMIC ® at100 g I 70 70 90 Galago at 100 ml ii 75 80 80 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 75 8090 iv 70 70 90 Mean 73 75 88 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 90 95 Galago at 150ml ii 90 95 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 80 90 100 iv 80 90 100 Mean 83 91 98DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 70 90 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 80 90 95 Wet-All at0.1% iii 80 90 100 iv 70 90 98 Mean 75 90 97 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 80 100100 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 90 100 100 iv 80100 100 Mean 85 100 100 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 95 100 100 Galago at 300 mlii 95 100 100 Wet-All at 0.2% iii 100 100 100 iv 95 100 100 Mean 96 100100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; AMAHY =Amaranthus hybridus

DINAMIC®+Galago without a wetter: DINAMIC® 700WDG at 100 g/ha+Galago480SC at 150 mL/ha showed satisfactory control of Amaranthus hybridusand Ipomoea purpurea. Rottboellia exaltata was insufficiently controlledby this mixture. It was however marginally controlled by DINAMIC® 700WDGat 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha. DINAMIC®+Galago with a wetter: Itis clear that a wetter improved efficacy. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% resulted in satisfactorycontrol of of Amaranthus hybridus and Ipomoea purpurea in comparison tothe equivalent treatment without a wetter (treatment 2). Rottboelliaexaltata could still not be controlled by this mixture and needed higherrates (DINAMIC® 700WDG at 100 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha+Wet-All at0.1%) to be controlled satisfactory. Signs of phytotoxicity were noticedin the plots were DINAMIC® 700WDG at 250 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 300mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% was sprayed. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago480SC at 100 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% can be used to control Amaranthushybridus and Ipomoea purpurea. To control Rottboellia exaltata DINAMIC®700WDG at 100 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% can beused.

H. Post Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)with or without Wet-All (available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) as a post emergence application against weeds inmaize (variety PHI 32Y85) was determined.

Trials were conducted at a site with a history of weeds. The trials wereexecuted under moderate weather conditions. Efficacy and visualphytotoxicity assessments were performed in triplicate. Normal practiceswere carried out to control insects and fungi. Crops were provided in 76cm row width, at a sowing rate of 65,000 plants/ha, and at a sowingdepth of five to eight cm. Soil class was clay with a clay content ofabout 35%. The site in this Example had been previously used for soyabeans. Trial design was randomized blocks with a plot size of 20 m²replicated four times. Municipal water was used for all applications(pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-50 was conducted at postemergence stage 14 days after planting. Application of the treatmentswas conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period, dry bulbtemperature was about 24-26° C., wet bulb temperature was about 20° C.,relative humidity was about 60%, cloud cover was about 70%, and windspeed was about 0 m/s. Treatments were administered with a multi-spraygas sprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80 nozzle. Spacing was 50 cm, with aheight of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, at a ground speed of 1 m/s, and acalibration mean output of 330 L/ha. The soil temperature over theapplication period averaged to about 23° C. and the soil remained moistand fine. Crops stage at the outset was about 4 leaves with a BBCH scaleof 14. Crop and weeds were actively growing. Weed stage was about 2-5leaves.

TABLE 6-50 Treatments Dosage rate Dosage rate No Treatments (gai/ha)(g/ha or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75Galago 480SC 48 100 2 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 72 150 3DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC 48 100 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70100 Galago 480SC 72 150 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 48100 6 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 72 150 7 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 175 250 Galago 480SC + 144 300 8 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75Galago 480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 9 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 10 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 11 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 12 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 13 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 14 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 175 250 Galago480SC + 144 300 Wet-All — 0.1%

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-51 to 6-53 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover the 6 weeks.

TABLE 6-51 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage6 Leaves BBCH scale 16 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 8 mm

TABLE 6-52 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage7 Leaves BBCH scale 17 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 44 mm

TABLE 6-53 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage9 leaves BBCH scale: 19 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 0 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-54 through 6-56. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-54 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I30 20 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 35 18 28 20 1 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 80 80 70 60 Galago at 100 ml ii80 80 70 60 iii 80 80 70 50 iv 80 70 60 70 Mean 80 78 68 60 2 DINAMIC ®at 75 g I 90 80 80 70 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 80 70 80 iii 90 80 70 80 iv90 80 70 80 Mean 90 80 73 78 3 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 70 80 70 Galagoat 100 ml ii 80 80 70 80 iii 90 70 80 70 iv 80 80 70 70 Mean 83 75 75 734 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 95 90 80 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 95 80 80 80 iii95 80 70 90 iv 90 80 80 80 Mean 94 83 78 85 5 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 80 8080 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 70 80 80 80 iii 80 80 80 70 iv 80 80 80 70Mean 78 80 80 75 6 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 90 95 90 Galago at 150 ml ii95 90 90 90 iii 95 80 90 80 iv 100 80 95 90 Mean 98 85 93 88 7 DINAMIC ®at 250 g I 100 100 95 95 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 95 95 iii 100 98 98100 iv 100 100 98 95 Mean 100 100 97 96 8 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 8070 Galago at 100 ml ii 98 100 90 80 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 80 70 iv100 100 80 70 Mean 100 100 83 73 9 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 80 80Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 80 80 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 80 iv100 100 90 80 Mean 100 100 85 80 10 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 98 100 90 70Galago at 100 ml ii 98 100 80 70 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 80 iv100 100 90 80 Mean 99 100 88 75 11 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 100 90 90Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 90 90 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 95 90 iv100 100 80 90 Mean 100 100 89 90 12 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 90 80Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 95 70 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 95 80 iv100 100 90 90 Mean 100 100 93 80 13 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 100 100Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 100 95 iv100 100 100 95 Mean 100 100 100 96 14 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 100 100 100100 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.2% iii 100 100 100100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 DIGSA = Digitariasanguinalis; POROL = Portulaca oleracea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus;COMBE = Commelina benghalensis

TABLE 6-55 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I40 10 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 50 10 30 10 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 40 13 28 20 1 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 70 60 50 Galago at 100 ml ii70 70 60 50 iii 70 70 60 50 iv 70 70 50 60 Mean 70 70 58 53 2 DINAMIC ®at 75 g I 80 80 80 60 Galago at 150 ml ii 70 80 60 60 iii 70 70 70 70 iv70 80 70 70 Mean 73 78 70 65 3 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 70 60 60 Galagoat 100 ml ii 80 80 60 70 iii 80 80 60 70 iv 70 70 60 70 Mean 78 75 60 684 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 90 90 80 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 95 70 70 70 iii95 80 70 70 iv 90 80 80 80 Mean 93 80 75 78 5 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 80 7070 70 Galago at 100 ml ii 70 70 70 70 iii 70 70 70 60 iv 70 70 70 70Mean 73 70 70 68 6 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 98 90 90 80 Galago at 150 ml ii90 80 90 80 iii 90 80 90 90 iv 100 80 90 80 Mean 95 83 90 83 7 DINAMIC ®at 250 g I 100 100 95 95 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 90 95 iii 100 98 95100 iv 100 100 95 90 Mean 100 100 94 95 8 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 8060 Galago at 100 ml ii 98 100 90 70 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 60 iv100 100 80 60 Mean 100 100 85 63 9 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 80 70Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 80 70 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 80 iv100 100 90 80 Mean 100 100 85 75 10 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 98 100 90 60Galago at 100 ml ii 95 100 90 60 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 70 iv100 100 90 80 Mean 98 100 90 68 11 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 100 90 80Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 90 80 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 95 80 iv100 100 90 80 Mean 100 100 91 80 12 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 95 70Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 95 90 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 95 70 iv100 100 90 80 Mean 100 100 94 78 13 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 100 100Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 90 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 100 90 iv100 100 100 90 Mean 100 100 100 93 14 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 100 100 100100 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.2% iii 100 100 100100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 DIGSA = Digitariasanguinalis; POROL = Portulaca oleracea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus;COMBE = Commelina benghalensis

TABLE 6-56 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I40 10 30 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 50 10 30 10 iv 30 10 40 20Mean 40 10 30 20 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 60 60 50 50 Galago at 100 ml ii 7060 60 50 iii 60 60 60 50 iv 70 60 50 50 Mean 65 60 55 50 DINAMIC ® at 75g I 80 80 70 60 Galago at 150 ml ii 70 80 60 60 iii 70 70 70 60 iv 60 8070 60 Mean 70 78 68 60 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 70 70 60 60 Galago at 100 mlii 70 70 60 60 iii 70 80 50 60 iv 60 60 60 60 Mean 68 70 58 60 DINAMIC ®at 100 g I 90 90 80 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 70 70 70 iii 90 70 70 60iv 80 80 70 70 Mean 88 78 73 70 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 70 70 60 60 Galagoat 100 ml ii 70 70 60 60 iii 70 70 70 60 iv 70 70 70 60 Mean 70 70 65 60DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 90 90 80 70 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 90 80 70 iii 9080 80 80 iv 100 80 80 80 Mean 93 85 80 75 DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 100 10095 90 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 95 95 iii 100 95 95 100 iv 100 100 9590 Mean 100 99 95 94 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 80 60 Galago at 100 mlii 100 100 90 60 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 80 50 iv 100 100 80 60 Mean100 100 83 58 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 80 60 Galago at 150 ml ii 100100 80 60 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 70 iv 100 100 90 80 Mean 100100 85 68 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 95 100 90 50 Galago at 100 ml ii 95 10090 60 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 60 iv 100 100 90 80 Mean 98 100 9063 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 100 95 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 95 80Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 95 80 iv 100 100 95 80 Mean 100 100 95 80DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 95 70 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 95 80Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 95 80 iv 100 100 95 80 Mean 100 100 95 78DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 100 95 Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 90Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 100 80 iv 100 100 100 90 Mean 100 100 100 89DINAMIC ® at 250 g I 100 100 100 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100Wet-All at 0.2% iii 100 100 100 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100100 DIGSA = Digitaria sanguinalis; POROL = Portulaca oleracea; AMAHY =Amaranthus hybridus; COMBE = Commelina benghalensis

The higher Galago rate (150 mL/ha) improves control when used as amixing partner for DINAMIC®. DINAMIC®+Galago without a wetter: DINAMIC®700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha showed satisfactory controlof Digitaria sanguinalis and Portulaca oleracea and marginal control ofAmaranthus hybridus. It could however not control Commilina benghalensisexcept with higher rates. DINAMIC®+Galago with a wetter: A wetter shouldbe used with these mixtures (see treatment 1 vs. treatment 8). DINAMIC®700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% resulted in100% control of Amaranthus spinosus and Portulaca oleracea in comparisonto 65% and 60% respectively without a wetter (treatment 1). Commilinabenghalensis could not be controlled by this mixture and needed higherrates (DINAMIC® 700WDG at 100 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha+Wet-All at0.1%) to be controlled satisfactory. No visual signs of phytotoxicitywere noticed throughout the growing season. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% can be used to controlDigitaria sanguinalis, Portulaca oleracea and Amaranthus hybridus. Tocontrol Commilina benghalensis DINAMIC® 700WDG at 100 g/ha+Galago 480SCat 150 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% can be used.

I. Post Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)with or without Wet-All (available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) as a post emergence application against weeds inmaize (variety PAN60-445B) was determined.

Trials were conducted at a site with a history of broad leaf weeds andgrasses. The trials were executed under moderate weather conditions.Efficacy and visual phytotoxicity assessments were performed intriplicate. Normal practices were carried out to control insects andfungi. Crops were provided in 76 cm row width, at a sowing rate of65,000 plants/ha, and at a sowing depth of five to eight cm. Soil classwas clay with a clay content of about 28%. The site in this Example hadbeen previously used for soya beans. Trial design was randomized blockswith a plot size of 20 m² replicated four times. Municipal water wasused for all applications (pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-57 was conducted at postemergence stage 18 days after planting. Application of the treatmentswas conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period, dry bulbtemperature was about 31° C., wet bulb temperature was about 28° C.,relative humidity was about 80%, cloud cover was about 100%, and windspeed was about 0 m/s. Treatments were administered with a multi-spraygas sprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80 nozzle. Spacing was 50 cm, with aheight of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, at a ground speed of 1 m/s, and acalibration mean output of 330 L/ha. The soil temperature over theapplication period averaged to about 29° C. and the soil remained moistand fine. Crops stage at the outset was about 4 leaves with a BBCH scaleof 14. Crop and weeds were actively growing. Weed stage was about 2-6leaves.

TABLE 6-57 Treatments Dosage rate Dosage rate No Treatments (gai/ha)(g/ha or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75Galago 480SC 48 100 2 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC 72 150 3DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC 48 100 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70100 Galago 480SC 72 150 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 48100 6 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC 72 150 7 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 175 250 Galago 480SC + 144 300 8 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75Galago 480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 9 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 10 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 11 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 12 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 13 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 14 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 175 250 Galago480SC + 144 300 Wet-All — 0.1%

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-58 to 6-60 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover 4 weeks. Signs of phytotoxicity were noticed in treatment 13 at 6weeks.

TABLE 6-58 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage6 Leaves BBCH scale 16 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 16 mm

TABLE 6-59 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage8 Leaves BBCH scale 18 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 30 mm

TABLE 6-60 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage10 leaves BBCH scale: 18 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 0 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-61 through 6-63. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-61 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) DAA AMASP ELEIN IPOPU COMBE Untreated control 235 18 28 20 % soil cover 4 35 13 30 23 6 33 13 30 25 1 DINAMIC ® at 75 g2 80 78 68 75 Galago at 100 ml 4 73 70 60 75 6 65 63 50 70 2 DINAMIC ®at 75 g 2 80 80 73 80 Galago at 150 ml 4 73 75 68 80 6 68 73 63 80 3DINAMIC ® at 100 g 2 85 85 75 80 Galago at 100 ml 4 78 78 68 80 6 73 7563 75 4 DINAMIC ® at 100 g 2 94 83 78 88 Galago at 150 ml 4 90 80 70 886 85 75 63 83 5 DINAMIC ® at 125 g 2 98 85 80 91 Galago at 100 ml 4 9680 70 91 6 95 78 65 85 6 DINAMIC ® at 125 g 2 98 90 93 88 Galago at 150ml 4 96 90 90 88 6 94 83 83 90 7 DINAMIC ® at 250 g 2 100 100 100 96Galago at 300 ml 4 100 100 100 96 6 100 100 100 95 8 DINAMIC ® at 75 g 2100 100 90 99 Galago at 100 ml 4 100 100 83 99 Wet-All at 0.1% 6 100 10080 90 9 DINAMIC ® at 75 g 2 100 100 100 98 Galago at 150 ml 4 100 100 9098 Wet-All at 0.1% 6 100 100 84 93 10 DINAMIC ® at 100 g 2 99 100 90 98Galago at 100 ml 4 100 100 83 98 Wet-All at 0.1% 6 100 100 78 93 11DINAMIC ® at 100 g 2 100 100 97 100 Galago at 150 ml 4 100 100 95 100Wet-All at 0.1% 6 100 100 90 100 12 DINAMIC ® at 125 g 2 100 100 97 100Galago at 100 ml 4 100 100 93 100 Wet-All at 0.1% 6 100 100 88 100 13DINAMIC ® at 125 g 2 100 100 100 100 Galago at 150 ml 4 100 100 100 100Wet-All at 0.1% 6 100 100 100 100 14 DINAMIC ® at 250 g 2 100 100 95 100Galago at 300 ml 4 100 100 99 100 Wet-All at 0.2% 6 100 100 99 100 AMASP= Amaranthus spinosus; COMBE = Commelina benghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoeapurpurea; ELEIN = Eleusine indica

TABLE 6-62 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after applicationTreatments (product/ha) Rep AMASP ELEIN IPOPU COMBE Untreated control I30 10 40 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 40 20 30 10 iv 30 10 30 30Mean 35 13 30 23 1 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 70 70 60 80 Galago at 100 ml ii70 70 60 70 iii 80 70 60 70 iv 70 70 60 80 Mean 73 70 60 75 2 DINAMIC ®at 75 g I 70 80 70 80 Galago at 150 ml ii 80 70 70 80 iii 70 70 60 80 iv70 80 70 80 Mean 73 75 68 80 3 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 80 70 70 80 Galagoat 100 ml ii 70 80 70 80 iii 80 80 70 80 iv 80 80 60 80 Mean 78 78 68 804 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 90 80 70 90 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 80 70 80 iii90 80 70 90 iv 90 80 70 90 Mean 90 80 70 88 5 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 10080 70 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 90 80 70 90 iii 95 80 70 90 iv 100 80 70 90Mean 96 80 70 91 6 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 90 90 90 Galago at 150 ml ii95 90 90 90 iii 90 90 90 80 iv 100 90 90 90 Mean 96 90 90 88 7 DINAMIC ®at 250 g I 100 100 100 95 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 95 iii 100 100100 100 iv 100 100 100 95 Mean 100 100 100 96 8 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100100 80 100 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 80 98 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 10090 98 iv 100 100 80 98 Mean 100 100 83 99 9 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 10098 95 Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 90 98 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 8098 iv 100 100 90 100 Mean 100 100 90 98 10 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 10080 95 Galago at 100 ml ii 98 100 90 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 80100 iv 100 100 80 100 Mean 100 100 83 98 11 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 100 10095 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 95 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 95100 iv 100 100 95 100 Mean 100 100 95 100 12 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100100 90 100 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 95 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100100 95 100 iv 100 100 90 100 Mean 100 100 93 100 13 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I100 100 100 100 Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii100 100 100 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 14 DINAMIC ® at250 g I 100 100 100 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at0.2% iii 100 100 95 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 99 100 AMASP =Amaranthus spinosus; COMBE = Commelina benghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoeapurpurea; ELEIN = Eleusine indica

TABLE 6-63 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep AMASP ELEIN IPOPU COMBE Untreated control I30 10 40 20 % soil cover ii 40 10 20 30 iii 30 20 30 20 iv 30 10 30 30Mean 33 13 30 25 1 DINAMIC ® at I 60 60 50 70 75 g Galago at 100 ml ii70 60 50 70 iii 70 70 50 70 iv 60 60 50 70 Mean 65 63 50 70 2 DINAMIC ®at I 70 70 60 80 75 g Galago at 150 ml ii 70 70 70 80 iii 60 70 60 80 iv70 80 60 80 Mean 68 73 63 80 3 DINAMIC ® at I 80 70 70 80 100 g Galagoat 100 ml ii 70 80 60 70 iii 70 70 60 70 iv 70 80 60 80 Mean 73 75 63 754 DINAMIC ® at I 90 70 60 80 100 g Galago at 150 ml ii 90 80 60 80 iii80 80 60 90 iv 80 70 70 80 Mean 85 75 63 83 5 DINAMIC ® at I 100 80 6090 125 g Galago at 100 ml ii 90 80 60 90 iii 90 70 70 80 iv 100 80 70 80Mean 95 78 65 85 6 DINAMIC ® at I 100 80 80 90 125 g Galago at 150 ml ii90 90 80 90 iii 90 80 80 90 iv 95 80 90 90 Mean 94 83 83 90 7 DINAMIC ®at I 100 100 100 95 250 g Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 90 iii 100 100100 98 iv 100 100 100 95 Mean 100 100 100 95 8 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 8090 75 g Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 80 90 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 8090 iv 100 100 80 90 Mean 100 100 80 90 9 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 95 90 75g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 80 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 80 90 iv100 100 80 95 Mean 100 100 84 93 10 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 80 90 100 gGalago at 100 ml ii 100 100 80 90 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 70 98 iv100 100 80 95 Mean 100 100 78 93 11 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 90 100 100 gGalago at 150 ml ii 100 100 90 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 100 iv100 100 90 100 Mean 100 100 90 100 12 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 80 100 125g Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 90 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 100iv 100 100 90 100 Mean 100 100 88 100 13 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100125 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100100 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 14 DINAMIC ® at I 100100 100 100 250 g Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.2%iii 100 100 95 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 99 100 AMASP =Amaranthus spinosus; COMBE = Commelina benghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoeapurpurea; ELEIN = Eleusine indica

The higher Galago rate (150 mL/ha) improves control when used as amixing partner for DINAMIC®. A wetter is beneficially used with thismixture. DINAMIC®+Galago without a wetter: DINAMIC® 700WDG at 125g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha showed satisfactory control of Amaranthusspinosus and Commilina benghalensis, and as soon as the Galago rateincreases to 150 mL/ha Eleusine indica and Ipomoea purpurea are alsocontrolled. DINAMIC®+Galago with a wetter: DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% resulted in excellentcontrol of Amaranthus spinosus, Commilina benghalensis and Eleusineindica, but Ipomoea purpurea was marginally controlled. Signs ofphytotoxicity were noticed in the plots were DINAMIC® 700WDG at 250g/ha+Galago 480SC at 300 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% was sprayed. DINAMIC®700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha can be used to controlAmaranthus spinosus, Eleusine indica, Ipomoea purpurea and Commilinabenghalensis. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% can be used to control Amaranthus spinosus,Eleusine indica, Ipomoea purpurea and Commilina benghalensis.

J. Post Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)or TOLLA 960 (available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary,N.C.) with or without Wet-All (available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) as a post emergence application against weeds inmaize (variety PHI 2369W) was determined. A comparison with CALLISTO®480SC plus GARDOGOLD® 500SC plus COMPLEMENT® Super (each available fromSyngenta, Greensboro, N.C.) was performed.

Trials were conducted at a site with a history of weeds. The trials wereexecuted under moderate weather conditions. Efficacy and visualphytotoxicity assessments were performed in triplicate. Normal practiceswere carried out to control insects and fungi. Crops were provided in 55cm row width, at a sowing rate of 65,000 plants/ha, and at a sowingdepth of five to eight cm. Soil class was clay with a clay content ofabout 40%. The site in this Example had been previously used for maize.Trial design was randomized blocks with a plot size of 20 m² replicatedfour times. Municipal water was used for all applications (pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-64 was conducted at postemergence stage 15 days after planting. Application of the treatmentswas conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period, dry bulbtemperature was about 32° C., wet bulb temperature was about 25° C.,relative humidity was about 50%, cloud cover was about 0%, and windspeed was about 0 m/s. Treatments were administered with a multi-spraygas sprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80 nozzle. Spacing was 50 cm, with aheight of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, at a ground speed of 1 m/s, and acalibration mean output of 330 L/ha. The soil temperature over theapplication period averaged to about 29° C. and the soil remained moistand fine. Crops stage at the outset was about 4 leaves with a BBCH scaleof 14. Crop and weeds were actively growing. Weed stage was about 3-5leaves.

TABLE 6-64 Treatments Dosage rate Dosage rate No Treatments (gai/ha)(g/ha or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75Galago 480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 2 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 3 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC +48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 72 150Wet-All — 0.1% 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 48 100Wet-All — 0.1% 6 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 72 150Wet-All — 0.1% 7 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 8 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC +72 150 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 9 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 10 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1%11 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 960 960 1000Wet-All — 0.1% 12 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 72 150TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 13 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 175 250 Galago480SC + 144 300 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 14 CALLISTO ® 480SC +52.5 260 GardoGold 500SC + 48 1562 Compliment Super 960 0.1%

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-65 to 6-67 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover 2 weeks. Signs of phytotoxicity were noticed in treatment 13 at 4and 6 weeks.

TABLE 6-65 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage5-6 Leaves BBCH scale 15-16 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 18mm

TABLE 6-66 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage8 Leaves BBCH scale 18 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 38 mm

TABLE 6-67 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage10 leaves BBCH scale: 20 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 0 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-68 through 6-70. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-68 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTEX AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I 30 4030 % soil cover ii 40 30 30 iii 40 50 10 iv 30 40 30 Mean 35 40 25 1DINAMIC ® at I 30 80 90 75 g ii 40 70 90 Galago at 100 ml iii 30 80 90Wet-All at 0.1% iv 20 80 90 Mean 30 78 90 2 DINAMIC ® at I 50 80 100 75g ii 40 80 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 40 90 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 50 80100 Mean 45 83 99 3 DINAMIC ® at I 40 80 95 100 g ii 40 90 95 Galago at100 ml iii 40 80 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 50 90 90 Mean 43 85 95 4DINAMIC ® at I 60 90 100 100 g ii 40 90 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 50 90100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 60 90 100 Mean 53 90 100 5 DINAMIC ® at I 50 9095 125 g ii 40 80 95 Galago at 100 ml iii 50 90 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv50 95 95 Mean 48 89 96 6 DINAMIC ® at I 70 100 100 125 g ii 50 100 100Galago at 150 ml iii 60 95 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 60 100 100 Mean 60 99100 7 DINAMIC ® at I 70 80 90 75 g ii 80 80 95 Galago at 100 ml iii 8080 95 TOLLA 960 at iv 80 80 90 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 78 80 93 8DINAMIC ® at I 70 100 100 75 g ii 80 90 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 80 80100 TOLLA 960 at iv 90 90 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 80 90 100 9DINAMIC ® at I 80 100 98 100 g ii 90 100 98 Galago at 100 ml iii 80 90100 TOLLA 960 at iv 80 90 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 83 95 98 10DINAMIC ® at I 90 90 100 100 g ii 80 90 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 80 90100 TOLLA 960 at iv 90 90 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 85 90 100 11DINAMIC ® at I 95 95 100 125 g ii 80 100 100 Galago at 100 ml iii 90 9098 TOLLA 960 at iv 90 90 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 89 94 98 12DINAMIC ® at I 90 100 100 125 g ii 100 100 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 95100 100 TOLLA 960 at iv 95 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 95 100100 13 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 250 g ii 95 100 100 Galago at 300 mliii 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iv 95 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean98 100 100 14 CALLISTO ® I 100 95 100 480SC at 260 ml ii 95 100 100GardoGOLD at iii 95 95 100 1562 ml iv 95 100 100 Compliment at 0.1% Mean96 98 100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPUI = Ipomoea purpurea; AMAHY= Amaranthus hybridus

TABLE 6-69 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTEX AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I 30 4030 % soil cover ii 40 30 30 iii 40 50 10 iv 30 40 30 Mean 35 40 25 1DINAMIC ® at I 40 80 90 75 g ii 40 80 90 Galago at 100 ml iii 30 90 95Wet-All at 0.1% iv 30 80 90 Mean 35 83 91 2 DINAMIC ® at I 50 90 100 75g ii 40 80 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 50 95 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 50 90100 Mean 48 89 99 3 DINAMIC ® at I 40 90 95 100 g ii 50 90 98 Galago at100 ml iii 40 90 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 50 90 95 Mean 45 90 97 4DINAMIC ® at I 60 100 100 100 g ii 50 100 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 50 95100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 60 95 100 Mean 55 98 100 5 DINAMIC ® at I 50 9595 125 g ii 50 90 100 Galago at 100 ml iii 60 95 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv50 95 98 Mean 53 94 98 6 DINAMIC ® at I 70 100 100 125 g ii 60 100 100Galago at 150 ml iii 70 98 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 60 100 100 Mean 65 100100 7 DINAMIC ® at I 70 90 90 75 g ii 80 90 98 Galago at 100 ml iii 8080 95 TOLLA 960 at iv 80 90 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 78 88 95 8DINAMIC ® at I 80 100 100 75 g ii 80 90 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 80 90100 TOLLA 960 at iv 90 95 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 83 94 100 9DINAMIC ® at I 80 100 100 100 g ii 90 100 98 Galago at 100 ml iii 90 95100 TOLLA 960 at iv 90 95 98 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 88 98 99 10DINAMIC ® at I 90 95 100 100 g ii 80 95 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 90 90100 TOLLA 960 at iv 90 95 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 88 94 100 11DINAMIC ® at I 95 98 100 125 g ii 90 100 100 Galago at 100 ml iii 95 95100 TOLLA 960 at iv 90 95 98 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 93 97 100 12DINAMIC ® at I 90 100 100 125 g ii 100 100 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 98100 100 TOLLA 960 at iv 98 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 97 100100 13 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 250 g ii 95 100 100 Galago at 300 mliii 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iv 100 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean99 100 100 14 CALLISTO ® I 100 100 100 480SC at 260 ml ii 95 100 100GardoGOLD at iii 98 95 100 1562 ml iv 100 100 100 Compliment at 0.1%Mean 98 99 100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea;AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus

TABLE 6-70 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep ROTEX AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I 30 4030 % soil cover ii 30 30 40 iii 40 50 10 iv 20 40 40 Mean 30 40 30 1DINAMIC ® at I 40 80 90 75 g ii 40 80 95 Galago at 100 ml iii 30 90 95Wet-All at 0.1% iv 40 90 95 Mean 38 85 94 2 DINAMIC ® at I 50 90 100 75g ii 50 90 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 50 98 98 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 50 90100 Mean 50 92 100 3 DINAMIC ® at I 50 90 95 100 g ii 50 95 100 Galagoat 100 ml iii 50 95 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 50 90 98 Mean 50 93 98 4DINAMIC ® at I 60 100 100 100 g ii 50 100 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 60100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 70 98 100 Mean 60 100 100 5 DINAMIC ® at I 5098 95 125 g ii 60 95 100 Galago at 100 ml iii 60 95 100 Wet-All at 0.1%iv 50 95 100 Mean 55 96 99 6 DINAMIC ® at I 70 100 100 125 g ii 70 100100 Galago at 150 ml iii 70 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 70 100 100 Mean70 100 100 7 DINAMIC ® at I 80 90 95 75 g ii 80 90 100 Galago at 100 mliii 80 90 95 TOLLA 960 at iv 90 95 98 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 83 9197 8 DINAMIC ® at I 90 100 100 75 g ii 80 95 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 8095 100 TOLLA 960 at iv 90 95 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 85 96 1009 DINAMIC ® at I 80 100 100 100 g ii 95 100 100 Galago at 100 ml iii 95100 100 TOLLA 960 at iv 90 95 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 90 99 10010 DINAMIC ® at I 90 98 100 100 g ii 90 95 100 Galago at 150 ml iii 9095 100 TOLLA 960 at iv 95 95 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 91 96 10011 DINAMIC ® at I 95 100 100 125 g ii 95 100 100 Galago at 100 ml iii 9595 100 TOLLA 960 at iv 95 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 95 99 10012 DINAMIC ® at I 98 100 100 125 g ii 100 100 100 Galago at 150 ml iii98 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iv 100 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% Mean 99100 100 13 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 250 g ii 98 100 100 Galago at 300ml iii 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iv 100 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1%Mean 100 100 100 14 CALLISTO ® I 100 100 100 480SC at 260 ml ii 98 100100 GardoGOLD at iii 100 98 100 1562 ml iv 100 100 100 Compliment at0.1% Mean 100 100 100 ROTTE = Rottboelia exaltata; IPOPU = Ipomoeapurpurea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus

DINAMIC®+Galago+Wet-All: Rottboellia exaltata could not be controlled byany dosage rates of this mixture. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago480SC at 100 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% resulted in satisfactory control ofAmaranthus hybridus and Ipomoea purpurea. With the exception ofRottboellia exaltata DINAMIC® 700WDG at 125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% compared with the standard CALLISTO® 480 SC at 260mL/ha+Gardo Gold at 1562 mL/ha+Compliment at 0.1%. Rottboellia exaltatawas 100% controlled by the standard treatment.DINAMIC®+Galago+TOLLA+Wet-All: DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago 480SCat 100 mL/ha+TOLLA 960EC at 1000 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% showed acceptablecontrol of the entire weed spectrum after 6 weeks. DINAMIC® 700WDG at125 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha+TOLLA 960EC at 1000 mL/ha+Wet-All at0.1% showed similar results to the standard CALLISTO® 480 SC at 260mL/ha+Gardo Gold at 1562 mL/ha+Compliment at 0.1%. Signs ofphytotoxicity were noticed in the plots were DINAMIC® 700WDG at 250g/ha+Galago 480SC at 300 mL/ha+TOLLA 960EC at 1000 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1%was sprayed. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 150 mL/ha+TOLLA960EC at 1000 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% can safely be used to control ofAmaranthus hybridus, Ipomoea purpurea and Rottboellia exaltata.

K. Post Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)or TOLLA 840S (available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary,N.C.) with or without Wet-All (available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) as a post emergence application against weeds inmaize (variety PHI 32Y85) was determined. A comparison with CALLISTO®480SC plus GARDOGOLD® 500SC plus COMPLEMENT® Super (each available fromSyngenta, Greensboro, N.C.) was performed.

Trials were conducted at a site with a history of weeds. The trials wereexecuted under moderate weather conditions. Efficacy and visualphytotoxicity assessments were performed in triplicate. Normal practiceswere carried out to control insects and fungi. Crops were provided in 76cm row width, at a sowing rate of 65,000 plants/ha, and at a sowingdepth of five to eight cm. Soil class was clay with a clay content ofabout 35%. The site in this Example had been previously used for soyabeans. Trial design was randomized blocks with a plot size of 20 m²replicated four times. Municipal water was used for all applications(pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-71 was conducted at postemergence stage 14 days after planting. Application of the treatmentswas conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period, dry bulbtemperature was about 26° C., wet bulb temperature was about 21° C.,relative humidity was about 65%, cloud cover was about 50%, and windspeed was about 0 m/s. Treatments were administered with a multi-spraygas sprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80 nozzle. Spacing was 50 cm, with aheight of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, at a ground speed of 1 m/s, and acalibration mean output of 330 L/ha. The soil temperature over theapplication period averaged to about 23° C. and the soil remained moistand fine. Crops stage at the outset was about 4 leaves with a BBCH scaleof 14. Crop and weeds were actively growing. Weed stage was about 2-5leaves.

TABLE 6-71 Treatments Dosage rate Dosage rate No Treatments (gai/ha)(g/ha or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75Galago 480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 2 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 3 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC +48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 72 150Wet-All — 0.1% 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 48 100Wet-All — 0.1% 6 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 72 150Wet-All — 0.1% 7 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 8 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC +72 150 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 9 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 10 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1%11 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 960 960 1000Wet-All — 0.1% 12 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 72 150TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 13 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 175 250 Galago480SC + 144 300 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 14 CALLISTO ® 480SC +52.5 260 GardoGold 500SC + 48 1562 Compliment 960 0.1%

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-72 to 6-74 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover 6 weeks.

TABLE 6-72 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage6 Leaves BBCH scale 16 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 8 mm

TABLE 6-73 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage7 Leaves BBCH scale 17 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 44 mm

TABLE 6-74 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage9 leaves BBCH scale: 19 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 0 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-75 through 6-77. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-75 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I30 20 20 30 % soil cover ii 40 10 30 20 iii 40 20 10 30 iv 30 20 20 30Mean 35 18 20 28 1 DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 70 70 75 g Galago at 100 ml ii70 80 70 80 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 80 70 60 70 iv 80 70 70 70 Mean 78 75 6873 2 DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 70 60 75 g Galago at 150 ml ii 90 80 80 70Wet-All at 0.1% iii 90 70 70 70 iv 90 70 70 70 Mean 88 75 73 68 3DINAMIC ® at I 70 90 90 80 100 g Galago at 100 ml ii 80 90 80 80 Wet-Allat 0.1% iii 80 80 90 80 iv 70 90 90 70 Mean 75 88 88 78 4 DINAMIC ® at I90 90 90 80 100 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 90 80 Wet-All at 0.1% iii95 90 90 80 iv 90 90 90 80 Mean 94 93 90 80 5 DINAMIC ® at I 90 100 9895 125 g Galago at 100 ml ii 95 100 100 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 90 100 9595 iv 90 100 95 95 Mean 91 100 97 95 6 DINAMIC ® at I 95 100 95 100 125g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 98 100 98 100iv 95 100 100 100 Mean 97 100 98 100 7 DINAMIC ® at I 90 100 85 90 75 gGalago at 100 ml ii 90 100 90 90 TOLLA 960 at iii 95 100 90 95 1000 mlWet-All at 0.1% iv 95 100 80 90 Mean 93 100 86 91 8 DINAMIC ® at I 95100 90 100 75 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100100 95 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 95 100 Mean 99 100 95 99 9DINAMIC ® at I 95 100 100 100 100 g Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 100 95TOLLA 960 at iii 98 100 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 95 100 100100 Mean 97 100 100 99 10 DINAMIC ® at I 90 100 95 95 100 g Galago at150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 100 100 1000 mlWet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 98 100 Mean 98 100 98 99 11 DINAMIC ® at I 90100 100 100 125 g Galago at 100 ml ii 90 100 98 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 95100 98 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 95 100 100 98 Mean 93 100 99 98 12DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 90 100 125 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 95 98 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 95 100Mean 100 100 95 100 13 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100 250 g Galago at300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 100 100 1000 mlWet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 14 CALLISTO ® I95 90 98 100 480SC at 260 ml GardoGOLD at ii 90 95 100 100 1562 mlCompliment at iii 95 100 98 100 0.1% iv 95 95 98 100 Mean 94 95 99 100DIGSA = Digitaria sanguinalis; POROL = Portulaca oleracea; AMAHY =Amaranthus hybridus; COMBE = Commelina benghalensis

TABLE 6-76 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I30 20 20 30 % soil cover ii 40 10 30 20 iii 40 20 10 30 iv 30 20 20 30Mean 35 18 20 28 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 80 80 70 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 8080 70 80 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 80 70 70 70 iv 90 80 80 70 Mean 83 78 73 75DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 90 80 70 70 Galago at 150 ml ii 90 80 80 80 Wet-Allat 0.1% iii 90 70 80 80 iv 98 80 80 70 Mean 92 78 78 75 DINAMIC ® at 100g I 80 90 90 80 Galago at 100 ml ii 90 90 90 80 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 8090 90 70 iv 80 90 90 80 Mean 83 90 90 78 DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 95 95 9080 Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 90 80 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 98 90 95 90 iv90 95 90 90 Mean 96 95 91 85 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 95 100 98 95 Galago at100 ml ii 98 100 100 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 90 100 95 95 iv 95 100 95 95Mean 95 100 97 95 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 98 100 95 100 Galago at 150 ml ii100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 98 100 iv 98 100 100 100Mean 99 100 98 100 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 90 100 85 90 Galago at 100 ml ii95 100 90 90 TOLLA 960 at 1000 ml iii 100 100 90 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iv98 100 80 90 Mean 96 100 86 91 DINAMIC ® at 75 g I 100 100 90 100 Galagoat 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at 1000 ml iii 100 100 95 95Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 95 100 Mean 100 100 95 99 DINAMIC ® at 100 gI 98 100 100 100 Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 100 95 TOLLA 960 at 1000 mliii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 95 100 100 100 Mean 98 100 100 99DINAMIC ® at 100 g I 95 100 95 95 Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100TOLLA 960 at 1000 ml iii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 98100 Mean 99 100 98 99 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 95 100 100 100 Galago at 100ml ii 90 100 98 100 TOLLA 960 at 1000 ml iii 98 100 98 95 Wet-All at0.1% iv 95 100 100 98 Mean 95 100 99 98 DINAMIC ® at 125 g I 100 100 90100 Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at 1000 ml iii 100 10095 98 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 95 100 Mean 100 100 95 100 DINAMIC ® at250 g I 100 100 100 100 Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at1000 ml iii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100100 100 100 CALLISTO ® 480SC I 95 90 98 100 at 260 ml ii 95 95 100 100GardoGOLD at 1562 ml iii 98 100 98 100 Compliment at 0.1% iv 95 95 98100 Mean 96 95 99 100 DIGSA = Digitaria sanguinalis; POROL = Portulacaoleracea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus; COMBE = Commelina benghalensis

TABLE 6-77 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep DIGSA POROL AMAHY COMBE Untreated control I20 20 30 30 % soil cover ii 20 20 40 20 iii 30 20 20 30 iv 20 30 20 30Mean 23 23 28 28 1 DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 70 80 75 g Galago at 100 ml ii90 70 80 70 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 90 70 70 70 iv 90 80 80 70 Mean 88 75 7573 2 DINAMIC ® at I 95 70 70 70 75 g Galago at 150 ml ii 90 80 80 80Wet-All at 0.1% iii 95 70 80 70 iv 100 70 70 70 Mean 95 73 75 73 3DINAMIC ® at I 80 80 90 80 100 g Galago at 100 ml ii 90 80 90 80 Wet-Allat 0.1% iii 80 80 90 70 iv 90 80 90 70 Mean 85 80 90 75 4 DINAMIC ® at I100 90 95 80 100 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 95 90 70 Wet-All at 0.1% iii100 90 95 80 iv 95 90 90 90 Mean 99 91 93 80 5 DINAMIC ® at I 98 100 10090 125 g Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 100 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 95 10095 95 iv 95 100 95 90 Mean 97 100 98 93 6 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 95 100125 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100100 100 iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 99 100 7 DINAMIC ® at I 95 10090 90 75 g Galago at 100 ml ii 95 100 90 95 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 9598 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 90 90 Mean 98 100 91 93 8DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 90 100 75 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 98 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 95 100Mean 100 100 96 99 9 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100 100 g Galago at 100ml ii 100 100 100 98 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at0.1% iv 98 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 10 DINAMIC ® at I 95 100 9595 100 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 99 100 99 99 11DINAMIC ® at I 95 100 100 100 125 g Galago at 100 ml ii 95 100 100 100TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 98 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 95 100 100 100Mean 96 100 100 99 12 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 95 100 125 g Galago at 150ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 100 100 1000 ml Wet-Allat 0.1% iv 100 100 98 100 Mean 100 100 98 100 13 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100100 100 250 g Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100100 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100100 14 CALLISTO ® I 95 95 100 100 480SC at 260 ml GardoGOLD at ii 95 95100 100 1562 ml Compliment at iii 98 100 98 100 0.1% iv 95 95 100 100Mean 96 96 100 100 DIGSA = Digitaria sanguinalis; POROL = Portulacaoleracea; AMAHY = Amaranthus hybridus; COMBE = Commelina benghalensis

DINAMIC®+Galago+Wet-All: DINAMIC® 700WDG at 100 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% resulted in satisfactory control of Digitariasanguinalis, Portulaca oleracea and Amaranthus hybridus. Commilinabenghalensis was insufficiently controlled but as soon as the Galagorate was increased to 100 mL/ha satisfactory control was achieved.DINAMIC®+Galago+TOLLA+Wet-All: The addition of TOLLA showed a drasticimprovement on control. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100mL/ha+TOLLA 960EC at 1000 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% showed excellent controlof the entire weed spectrum after 6 weeks. This mixture performed on parwith the standard CALLISTO® 480 SC at 260 mL/ha+Gardo Gold at 1562mL/ha+Compliment at 0.1%. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedthroughout the growing season. DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago 480SCat 100 mL/ha+TOLLA 960EC at 1000 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% can be used forto control Digitaria sanguinalis, Portulaca oleracea, Amaranthushybridus and Commilina benghalensis.

L. Post Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

In this part of the Example the efficacy of DINAMIC® (amicarbazone700WDG, 700 grams active/kg, available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) mixtures with Galago (mesotrione 480SC, 480 gramsactive/L, available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary, N.C.)or TOLLA 840S (available from Arysta LifeScience North America, Cary,N.C.) with or without Wet-All (available from Arysta LifeScience NorthAmerica, Cary, N.C.) as a post emergence application against weeds inmaize (variety PAN60-445B) was determined. A comparison with CALLISTO®480SC plus GARDOGOLD® 500SC plus COMPLEMENT® Super (each available fromSyngenta, Greensboro, N.C.) was performed.

Trials were conducted at a site with a history of broad leaf weeds andgrasses. The trials were executed under moderate weather conditions.Efficacy and visual phytotoxicity assessments were performed intriplicate. Normal practices were carried out to control insects andfungi. Crops were provided in 76 cm row width, at a sowing rate of65,000 plants/ha, and at a sowing depth of five to eight cm. Soil classwas clay with a clay content of about 28%. The site in this Example hadbeen previously used for soya beans. Trial design was randomized blockswith a plot size of 20 m² replicated four times. Municipal water wasused for all applications (pH=7.2).

Application of the treatments shown in Table 6-78 was conducted at postemergence stage 18 days after planting. Application of the treatmentswas conducted over a 24 hour period. Over this time period, dry bulbtemperature was about 31° C., wet bulb temperature was about 28° C.,relative humidity was about 80%, cloud cover was about 100%, and windspeed was about 0 m/s. Treatments were administered with a multi-spraygas sprayer with a 4× flat fan 03F80 nozzle. Spacing was 50 cm, with aheight of 50 cm, pressure 2.8 Bar, at a ground speed of 1 m/s, and acalibration mean output of 330 L/ha. The soil temperature over theapplication period averaged to about 29° C. and the soil remained moistand fine. Crops stage at the outset was about 4 leaves with a BBCH scaleof 14. Crop and weeds were actively growing. Weed stage was about 2-6leaves.

TABLE 6-78 Treatments Dosage rate Dosage rate No Treatments (gai/ha)(g/ha or mL/ha) Untreated control — — 1 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75Galago 480SC + 48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 2 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago480SC + 72 150 Wet-All — 0.1% 3 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC +48 100 Wet-All — 0.1% 4 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 72 150Wet-All — 0.1% 5 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 48 100Wet-All — 0.1% 6 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 72 150Wet-All — 0.1% 7 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 8 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 52.5 75 Galago 480SC +72 150 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 9 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 70 100Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 10 DINAMIC ®700WDG + 70 100 Galago 480SC + 72 150 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1%11 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 48 100 TOLLA 960 960 1000Wet-All — 0.1 % 12 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 87.5 125 Galago 480SC + 72 150TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 13 DINAMIC ® 700WDG + 175 250 Galago480SC + 144 300 TOLLA 960 960 1000 Wet-All — 0.1% 14 CALLISTO ® 480SC +52.5 260 GardoGold 500SC + 48 1562 Compliment 960 0.1%

Assessments of the treated crops at 2, 4, and 6 weeks are summarized inTables 6-79 to 6-81 below. No visual signs of phytotoxicity were noticedover 4 weeks. Signs of phytotoxicity were noticed in treatment 13 at 6weeks.

TABLE 6-79 2 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage6 Leaves BBCH scale 16 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 16 mm

TABLE 6-80 4 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage8 Leaves BBCH scale 18 Soil moisture Wet Rain since last visit 30 mm

TABLE 6-81 6 Week Assessment Crop condition Actively growing Crop stage10 leaves BBCH scale: 18 Soil moisture Moist Rain since last visit 0 mm

Control and weed cover at 2, 4, and 6 weeks for the indicated speciesare summarized below in Tables 6-82 through 6-84. 80% is consideredacceptable control.

TABLE 6-82 % Control and weed cover (2 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep AMASP ELEIN IPOPI COMBI Untreated control I30 30 20 20 % soil cover ii 20 40 10 30 iii 30 40 20 10 iv 30 30 20 20Mean 28 35 18 20 1 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 90 100 75 g Galago at 100 mlii 98 100 90 98 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 98 iv 100 100 90 98 Mean100 100 90 99 2 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 95 75 g Galago at 150 ml ii100 100 100 98 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 100 98 iv 100 100 100 100Mean 100 100 100 98 3 DINAMIC ® at I 98 100 90 95 100 g Galago at 100 mlii 98 100 90 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 100 iv 100 100 90 100Mean 99 100 90 98 4 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 95 100 100 g Galago at 150 mlii 100 100 98 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 95 100 iv 100 100 98 100Mean 100 100 97 100 5 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 95 100 125 g Galago at 100ml ii 100 100 98 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 98 100 iv 100 100 98100 Mean 100 100 97 100 6 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100 125 g Galago at150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 100 100 iv 100 100100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 7 DINAMIC ® at I 90 95 100 90 75 g Galagoat 100 ml ii 90 90 100 95 TOLLA 960 at iii 95 90 100 95 1000 ml Wet-Allat 0.1% iv 90 95 100 95 Mean 91 93 100 100 8 DINAMIC ® at I 95 90 100 9575 g Galago at 150 ml ii 95 90 100 95 TOLLA 960 at iii 95 90 100 98 1000ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 98 90 100 95 Mean 96 90 100 96 9 DINAMIC ® at I 9095 100 98 100 g Galago at 100 ml ii 90 90 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 90 90100 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 90 90 100 100 Mean 90 91 100 98 10DINAMIC ® at I 98 98 100 100 100 g Galago at 150 ml ii 98 95 100 100TOLLA 960 at iii 98 98 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 90 95 100 100Mean 96 97 100 100 11 DINAMIC ® at I 95 100 100 95 125 g Galago at 100ml ii 95 98 100 95 TOLLA 960 at iii 90 95 100 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1%iv 95 95 100 98 Mean 94 97 100 96 12 DINAMIC ® at I 98 98 100 98 125 gGalago at 150 ml ii 100 95 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 98 100 100 1000ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 95 95 100 100 Mean 98 97 100 100 13 DINAMIC ® at I100 98 100 100 250 g Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 atiii 100 100 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 98 100 100 Mean 10099 100 100 14 CALLISTO ® I 90 98 100 90 480SC at 260 ml GardoGOLD at ii90 95 100 95 1562 ml Compliment at iii 95 90 100 90 0.1% iv 95 90 100 90Mean 93 93 100 91 AMASP = Amaranthus spinosus; COMBE = Commelinabenghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; ELEIN = Eleusine indica

TABLE 6-83 % Control and weed cover (4 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep AMASP ELEIN IPOPI COMBI Untreated control I30 30 20 20 % soil cover ii 20 30 20 30 iii 30 30 20 20 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 28 28 23 23 1 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 80 100 75 g Galago at 100 mlii 100 100 80 98 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 98 iv 100 100 80 98 Mean100 100 83 99 2 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 98 95 75 g Galago at 150 ml ii100 100 90 98 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 80 98 iv 100 100 90 100 Mean100 100 90 98 3 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 80 95 100 g Galago at 100 ml ii98 100 90 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 80 100 iv 100 100 80 100 Mean100 100 83 98 4 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 95 100 100 g Galago at 150 ml ii100 100 95 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 95 100 iv 100 100 95 100 Mean100 100 95 100 5 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 90 100 125 g Galago at 100 ml ii100 100 95 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 95 100 iv 100 100 90 100 Mean100 100 93 100 6 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100 125 g Galago at 150 mlii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 100 100 iv 100 100 100100 Mean 100 100 100 100 7 DINAMIC ® at I 100 98 100 90 75 g Galago at100 ml ii 100 95 100 95 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 98 100 95 1000 ml Wet-Allat 0.1% iv 100 100 100 95 Mean 100 98 100 100 8 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100100 95 75 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 95 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100100 98 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100 95 Mean 100 100 100 96 9DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 98 100 g Galago at 100 ml ii 100 98 100 100TOLLA 960 at iii 100 95 100 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100100 Mean 100 98 100 98 10 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100 100 g Galago at150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 100 100 1000 mlWet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 11 DINAMIC ® atI 100 100 100 95 125 g Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 100 95 TOLLA 960 atiii 100 95 100 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 98 100 98 Mean 100 98100 96 12 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 98 125 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 13 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100250 g Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 100100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 14CALLISTO ® I 100 100 100 90 480SC at 260 ml GardoGOLD at ii 100 100 10095 1562 ml Compliment at iii 100 100 100 90 0.1% iv 100 100 100 90 Mean100 100 100 91 AMASP = Amaranthus spinosu; COMBE = Commelinabenghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; ELEIN = Eleusine indica

TABLE 6-84 % Control and weed cover (6 weeks after application)Treatments (product/ha) Rep AMASP ELEIN IPOPI COMBI Untreated control I30 20 20 30 % soil cover ii 30 20 20 30 iii 40 20 20 20 iv 30 20 30 20Mean 33 20 23 25 1 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 80 90 75 g Galago at 100 ml ii100 100 80 90 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 80 90 iv 100 100 80 90 Mean100 100 80 90 2 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 95 90 75 g Galago at 150 ml ii100 100 80 95 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 80 90 iv 100 100 80 95 Mean100 100 84 93 3 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 80 90 100 g Galago at 100 ml ii100 100 80 90 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 70 98 iv 100 100 80 95 Mean100 100 78 93 4 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 90 100 100 g Galago at 150 ml ii100 100 90 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 100 iv 100 100 90 100 Mean100 100 90 100 5 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 80 100 125 g Galago at 100 ml ii100 100 90 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 90 100 iv 100 100 90 100 Mean100 100 88 100 6 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100 125 g Galago at 150 mlii 100 100 100 100 Wet-All at 0.1% iii 100 100 100 100 iv 100 100 100100 Mean 100 100 100 100 7 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 95 75 g Galago at100 ml ii 100 98 100 95 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 100 98 1000 ml Wet-Allat 0.1% iv 100 100 100 98 Mean 100 100 100 100 8 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100100 95 75 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100 100 100 98 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100 95 Mean 100 100 100 97 9DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100 100 g Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 100 100TOLLA 960 at iii 100 95 100 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100100 Mean 100 99 100 99 10 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100 100 g Galago at150 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 100 100 1000 mlWet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 11 DINAMIC ® atI 100 100 100 98 125 g Galago at 100 ml ii 100 100 100 98 TOLLA 960 atiii 100 95 100 95 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 99100 98 12 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100 125 g Galago at 150 ml ii 100100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 100 100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 13 DINAMIC ® at I 100 100 100 100250 g Galago at 300 ml ii 100 100 100 100 TOLLA 960 at iii 100 100 100100 1000 ml Wet-All at 0.1% iv 100 100 100 100 Mean 100 100 100 100 14CALLISTO ® I 100 100 100 95 480SC at 260 ml GardoGOLD at ii 100 100 10095 1562 ml Compliment at iii 100 100 100 90 0.1% iv 100 100 100 95 Mean100 100 100 94 AMASP = Amaranthus spinosus; COMBE = Commelinabenghalensis; IPOPU = Ipomoea purpurea; ELEIN = Eleusine indica

The results indicate that TOLLA was unnecessarily added to theDINAMIC®+Galago+Wet-All mixture as the mixture gave sufficient controlwithout TOLLA. DINAMIC®+Galago+Wet-All: DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% resulted in excellentcontrol of Amaranthus spinosus and satisfactory control of Commilinabenghalensis and Ipomoea purpurea. With the exception of Ipomoeapurpurea this mixture compared with the standard CALLISTO® 480 SC at 260mL/ha+Gardo Gold at 1562 mL/ha+Compliment at 0.1%.DINAMIC®+Galago+TOLLA+Wet-All: DINAMIC® 700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago 480SCat 100 mL/ha+TOLLA 960EC at 1000 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% showed 100%control of the entire weed spectrum after 6 weeks. This mixtureoutperformed the standard CALLISTO® 480 SC at 260 mL/ha+Gardo Gold at1562 mL/ha+Compliment at 0.1%. Signs of phytotoxicity were noticed inthe plots were DINAMIC® 700WDG at 250 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 300mL/ha+TOLLA 960EC at 1000 mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% was sprayed. DINAMIC®700WDG at 75 g/ha+Galago 480SC at 100 mL/ha+TOLLA 960EC at 1000mL/ha+Wet-All at 0.1% can be used to control of Amaranthus spinosus,Eleusine indica, Ipomoea purpurea and Commilina benghalensis.

M. Pre Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

This Example compares the herbicidal selectivity and efficacy ofDINAMIC® 700WDG applied in combination with Galago and TOLLA 840S as apre-emergence application with regards to both crop and weeds in dryland maize. Treatments and conditions are tabulated below.

TABLE 6-85 Treatments Rate/ha TREATMENT Product ( 

) a.i. (g) 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago  75 g + 100 m 

  52.5 + 48   2 DINAMIC ® + Galago  75 g + 150 m 

  52.5 + 72   3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 100 g + 100 m 

  70 + 48 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago 100 g + 150 m 

  70 + 72 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago 125 g + 100 m 

  87.5 + 48   6 DINAMIC ® + Galago 125 g + 150 m 

  87.5 + 72   7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S  75 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

  52.5 + 48 + 840 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S  75 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

  52.5 + 72 + 840 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 100 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

    70 + 48 + 840 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 100 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

    70 + 72 + 840 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 125 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

  87.5 + 48 + 840 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 125 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

  87.5 + 72 + 840 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 250 g + 300 m 

  + 2.0  

  175 + 144 + 1680 14 CALLISTO ® + Dual Gold 260 m 

  + 710 m 

  125 + 650 15 Untreated control — —

TABLE 6-86 Test products Manufacturer/ Reg. Product Active IngredientForm Supplier No. 1 DINAMIC ® Amicarbazone WDG Arysta 700WDG 700 g/kgLifescience 2 Galago Mesotrione 480 g/ 

SC Arysta L. 8089 Lifescience 3 TOLLA 840 S Metolachlor EC Arysta L.7374 840 g/ 

  + Safener Lifescience 4 CALLISTO ® Mesotrione 480 g/ 

SC Syngenta L. 6795 5 DUAL S S-Metolachlor EC Syngenta L. 5749 GOLD ®915 g/ 

  + Safener

TABLE 6-87 TRIAL DESIGN: Design Completely randomized design ReplicatesFive Plot size 5 m × 2.5 m = Nett/plot

TABLE 6-88 SPRAYER Sprayer CO₂ Precision Sprayer Boom 2.5 m aluminiumNozzle 5 × 11002 flat fan nozzles (Teejet 11002 DG) Pressure 2.7 BarApplication 200  

 /ha

Spray Water Quality

pH: 6.62EC: 0.85 mS/m

Spray Volume

200

/ha at 2.7 Bar

TABLE 6-89 WEATHER INFORMATION AT APPLICATION Temperature (max) 21.9° C.RH: 48% Wind: 0-10 km/h, N Cloud 6/8

TABLE 6-90 SOIL PROPERTIES AT APPLICATION: Clay Fraction 16.0% SiltFraction  3.5% Sand Fraction 80.5% pH (KCl) 5.1 Moisture Surface dry,subsurface moist at 6 cm Seedbed condition Medium to cloddy

Irrigation

None (rain-fed)

Crop Crop: Maize Variety: Phb 31 G 54 BR

Growth stage: Pre-emergence (BBCH growth stage 00)Sowing depth: 5 cmSowing density: 45000 plants/ha

TABLE 6-91 WEED INFORMATION SPECIES COMMON NAME ABBREVIATION Bidenspilosa Blackjack BIDPI Amaranthus hybridus Pigweed AMAHY Tagetes minutaKhaki weed TAGMI Digitaria sanquinalis Crab-finger grass DIGSA

TABLE 6-92 ASSESSMENT DETAILS: Method Comparative Efficacy HerbicideEfficacy: Number of weeds in treated versus untreated plotsSelectivity: 1. Visual phytotoxicity: BBA 1-9 scale (refer to appendixfor details) 2. Yield: 20 cobs harvested at random from each plot.Average grain weight per plot determined using a precision 2 decimalscale. Statistical evaluation: ANOVA at the 95% probability using TukeysLSD formulae Assessment 14 DAA-Efficacy/Selectivity Times-Days 28DAA-Efficacy/Selectivity After 42 DAA-Efficacy/Selectivity Application56 DAA-Efficacy (DAA) Harvest-Selectivity

TABLE 6-93 Comparative yield of DINAMIC ® 700WDG programs YIELD(Kg/plot) Replicate TREATMENT I II III IV Mean 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago 2.772.45 3.07 3.25 2.89 b 75 g + 100 ml 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago 2.14 2.11 3.032.65  2.34 ab 75 g + 150 ml 0 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 2.45 3.12 2.33 2.50 2.70 ab 100 g + 100 ml 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago 2.35 2.33 2.50 2.32  2.72ab 100 g + 150 ml 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago 3.00 3.13 2.97 2.42 2.44 b 125g + 100 ml 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago 2.67 2.17 2.06 2.06 2.75 a 125 g + 150ml 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 2.64 2.56 2.76 3.00  2.16 ab 75 g +100 ml + 1.0 l 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 2.73 2.90 2.98 3.062.30 b 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 2.70 2.862.94 3.02 2.39 b 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA840S 2.73 2.90 2.98 3.06 2.47 b 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 11 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 840S 2.71 2.87 2.96 3.04 2.92 b 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 12DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 2.70 2.87 2.95 3.03 2.88 b 125 g + 150ml + 1.0 l 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 2.72 2.88 2.96 3.05 2.67 b250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l 14 CALLISTO ® + Dual Gold 2.68 2.85 2.93 3.012.99 b 260 ml + 710 ml 15 Untreated control 2.68 2.84 2.92 3.00 2.89 bNote: Treatment means sharing the same letter do not differsignificantly by LSD test at the 5% (α = 0.05) level of probability

TABLE 6-94 Comparative visual phytotoxicity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpre-emergence programs BBA VISUAL PHYTOTOXICITY SCALE (1 - no damage;9 - dead) Replicate TREATMENT Timing I II III IV Mean 1 DINAMIC ® +Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 100 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 2DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 150 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 11 1.0 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 100 g + 100 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.042 1 1 1 1 1.0 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 100 g + 150 ml 28 1 11 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 125 g + 100ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 125g + 150 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA840S 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.08 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 1 1 11 1.0 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 10DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 281 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 1 1 1 11.0 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 12 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 28 1 1 1 1 1.042 1 1 1 1 1.0 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 250 g +300 ml + 2.0 l 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 14 CALLISTO ® + Dual Gold14 1 1 1 1 1.0 260 ml + 710 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 15Untreated control 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0

TABLE 6-95 Comparative herbicidal activity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpre-emergence programs AVERAGE % WEED CONTROL BY SPECIES % C = Visual %weed control % P = Visual % weed pressure BIDPI AMAHY TAGMI DIGSA % % %% % % % % TREATMENT Timing C P C P C P C P 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 95 585 3 100 3 45 3 75 g + 100 ml 28 90 10 75 10 100 5 40 5 42 80 12 65 1580 10 20 10 56 60 15 55 20 70 12 10 15 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 98 5 96 3100 1 50 1 75 g + 150 ml 28 96 10 90 5 100 3 50 3 42 80 15 85 10 94 5 3010 56 70 20 80 20 90 10 20 15 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 96 3 95 3 100 1 455 100 g + 100 ml 28 92 5 93 5 100 3 40 10 42 75 10 85 10 90 5 20 15 5665 12 70 20 80 10 10 25 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 96 3 98 3 100 1 55 3 100g + 150 ml 28 92 5 96 5 100 5 50 5 42 85 10 92 15 95 10 40 10 56 70 1090 25 90 12 35 15 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 99 3 98 3 100 1 50 5 125 g +100 ml 28 96 5 96 5 100 3 45 10 42 90 10 92 10 100 5 30 15 56 85 15 9020 98 12 20 25 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 96 5 99 5 100 3 55 1 125 g + 150ml 28 92 10 95 10 100 5 55 3 42 90 12 92 15 94 10 45 10 56 90 15 90 2590 12 40 15 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 99 5 100 5 100 3 99 575 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 28 96 10 98 10 100 5 99 10 42 90 12 92 15 94 10 9915 56 85 15 88 25 92 15 98 25 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 99 5100 5 100 3 100 3 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 28 95 10 98 15 100 5 100 5 42 9015 96 25 94 10 98 10 56 90 20 94 30 92 15 98 15 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago +TOLLA 840S 14 100 3 98 3 100 1 100 5 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 28 99 5 95 5100 3 100 10 42 90 10 92 15 99 5 100 15 56 85 12 90 20 98 10 98 25 10DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 100 3 100 1 100 1 100 1 100 g + 150ml + 1.0 l 28 99 5 99 5 100 5 99 3 42 96 10 95 10 99 10 98 10 56 90 1090 20 98 12 98 15 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 100 5 100 3 1003 100 1 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 28 99 10 98 5 100 5 100 3 42 92 12 90 1095 10 99 5 56 85 15 88 20 90 15 98 15 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S14 100 3 100 1 100 1 100 1 125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 28 99 8 99 5 99 3 1003 42 92 12 95 7 99 5 98 5 56 90 15 93 15 95 10 98 15 13 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 100 3 100 3 100 1 100 3 250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l 28100 5 100 5 100 3 100 5 42 99 12 99 10 100 5 100 15 56 98 15 97 15 10010 99 25 14 CALLISTO ® + DUAL S GOLD ® 14 99 5 100 3 100 3 100 5 260ml + 710 ml 28 96 8 97 5 100 5 100 10 42 92 12 97 10 98 10 100 20 56 9215 94 20 96 15 99 25 15 Untreated control 14 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 3 28 0 5 0 50 5 0 5 42 0 10 0 10 0 10 0 15 56 0 15 0 20 0 15 0 25

The trial was conducted on a commercial maize crop produced under dryland conditions. The DINAMIC® 700WDG formulation was evaluated forherbicidal activity and crop selectivity when applied as a pre-emergencespray program in tank-mix combination with Galago and TOLLA 840S.Treatments were applied pre-emergence of crop and weeds as broadcastapplications over the maize rows. Treatments were applied one day afterplanting. First rains (10 mm) were recorded at 6 days followingapplication. Weather conditions were dry with infrequent showers of rainoccurring for the duration of the trial. At 30 days followingapplication heavy rains (140 mm) were recorded. Thereafter dryconditions prevailed for the remainder of the trial.

No visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting, chlorosis,necrosis or growth-abnormalities were observed on any of the treatmentsreceiving the tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago andDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S, whether applied at single or doublerates, respectively. The tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC®700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S displayed a similar level of herbicidalselectivity as the standard tank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+DUAL SGOLD®.

The weed spectrum at the trial site consisted of broadleaved weeds and asingle grass weed (DIGSA). The broadleaved weed spectrum was composed ofBlackjack (BIDPI), Pigweed (AMAHY) and Khaki weed (TAGMI). Efficacyevaluations were conducted at 14, 28, 42 and 56 days followingapplication, respectively.

DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago displayed a typicaldosage related efficacy response between the rates of 75-125 g/haapplied. Higher rates DINAMIC® 700WDG gave improved activity againstbroadleaved weeds, while an increase in the rate of Galago improvedherbicidal activity against broadleaved weeds and grasses. At the finalassessment conducted at 56 DAA, the tank-mix combination ofDINAMIC®+Galago applied at 125 g/ha+150 m

/ha exhibited commercially acceptable levels of herbicidal activityagainst the entire broadleaved weed spectrum consisting of BIDPI, AMAHYand TAGMI. DINAMIC® applied at the rate of 100 g/ha in combination withGalago at 150 m

/ha displayed commercial levels of herbicidal activity against thebroadleaved weeds AMAHY and TAGMI at the final assessment.

Dinamic® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S

The addition of TOLLA 840S to the tank-mix combination of DINAMIC®700WDG+Galago greatly enhanced the herbicidal activity against the grassweed DIGSA, with all tank-mix combinations exhibiting commercial controlof DIGSA at the final assessment conducted at 56 DAA. DINAMIC® 700WDGtreatments applied between the rates of 75-125 g/ha in combination withGalago at 150 m

/ha and TOLLA 840S at 1.0

/ha exhibited commercially acceptable levels of herbicidal activityagainst the entire weed spectrum consisting of the grass weed DIGSA andthe broadleaved weeds, BIDPI, AMAHY and TAGMI, respectively. In tank-mixcombinations where Galago was applied at the lower rate of 100 m

/ha and the rate of DINAMIC® 700WDG exceeded 75 g/ha, commerciallyacceptable levels of activity were observed for the broadleaved weedsAMAHY and TAGMI, respectively. The tank-mix combination of DINAMIC®700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S applied at 125 g/ha+150 m

/ha+1.0

/ha achieved comparable levels of herbicidal activity as the standardtank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+Dual Gold applied at 260 m

/ha+710 m

/ha.

Compatibility

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S, whetherapplied at single or double rates.

No visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting, chlorosis,necrosis or growth-abnormalities were observed on any of the treatmentsreceiving the tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago andDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S, whether applied at single or doublerates, respectively.

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago displayed a typicaldosage related efficacy response between the rates of 75-125 g/haapplied.

DINAMIC®+Galago applied at 125 g/ha+150 m

/ha exhibited commercially acceptable levels of herbicidal activityagainst the entire broadleaved weed spectrum consisting of BIDPI, AMAHYand TAGMI, but not the grass weed DIGSA.

The addition of TOLLA 840S to the tank-mix combination of DINAMIC®700WDG+Galago greatly enhanced the herbicidal activity against the grassweed DIGSA. DINAMIC® 700WDG treatments applied between the rates of75-125 g/ha in combination with Galago at 150 m

/ha and TOLLA 840S at 1.0

/ha exhibited commercially acceptable levels of herbicidal activityagainst the entire weed spectrum consisting of the grass weed DIGSA andthe broadleaved weeds, BIDPI, AMAHY and TAGMI, respectively.

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S, whetherapplied at single or double rates.

TABLE 6-96 Anova Table Grain yield (kg/plot) Degrees of Sums of Mean FUnit freedom Squares Squares Value Reps 3 0.3544 Treatments 14 2.7670.1976 3.901 Error 42 2.128 0.5066 Total 59 5.249 Overall mean 2.755 S.Efor Difference 0.1592 Least Significant Difference (LSD) at 95% 0.3212

TABLE 6-97 BBA Visual Phytotoxicity rating scale EQUIVALENT Scale %Description 1 0% NO DAMAGE 2 0.1-2.5% NEGLIGIBLE DAMAGE 3 2.5-5.0%MODERATE DAMAGE No effects on yield and/or quality 4 5.0-10%  Damage upto limits of commercial acceptability-if no yield loss 5 10-15% DISTINCTDAMAGE Commercially acceptable only under certain conditions-if no yieldloss 6 15-25% SEVERE DAMAGE Not commercially acceptable-yield loss andquality 7 25-35% VERY SEVERE DAMAGE 8 35-68% EXTREME DAMAGE 9  68-100%START OF WITHERING AND DEATH

N. Pre Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

This Example compares the herbicidal selectivity and efficacy ofDINAMIC® 700WDG applied in combination with Galago and TOLLA 840S as apre-emergence application with regards to both crop and weeds inirrigated maize. Treatments are conditions are tabulated below.

TABLE 6-98 Treatments Rate/ha TREATMENT Product ( 

 ) a.i. (g) 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago  75 g + 100 m 

  52.5 + 48 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago  75 g + 150 m 

  52.5 + 72 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 100 g + 100 m 

    70 + 48 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago 100 g + 150 m 

    70 + 72 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago 125 g + 100 m 

  87.5 + 48 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago 125 g + 150 m 

  87.5 + 72 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S  75 g + 100 m 

 + 1.0  

  52.5 + 48 + 840 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S  75 g + 150 m 

 + 1.0  

  52.5 + 72 + 840 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 100 g + 100 m 

 + 1.0  

    70 + 48 + 840 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 100 g + 150 m 

 + 1.0  

    70 + 72 + 840 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 125 g + 100 m 

 + 1.0  

  87.5 + 48 + 840 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 125 g + 150 m 

 + 1.0  

  87.5 + 72 + 840 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 250 g + 300 m 

 + 2.0  

  175 + 144 + 1680 14 CALLISTO ® + Dual Gold 260 m 

 + 710 m 

  125 + 650 15 Untreated control

TABLE 6-99 Test products used Manufacturer/ Product Active IngredientForm Supplier Reg. No. 1 DINAMIC ® Amicarbazone 700 g/kg WDG ArystaLifescience 700WDG 2 Galago Mesotrione 480 g/ 

  SC Arysta Lifescience L. 8089 3 TOLLA 840 S Metolachlor 840 g/ 

  + Safener EC Arysta Lifescience L. 7374 4 CALLISTO ® Mesotrione 480g/ 

  SC Syngenta L. 6795 5 DUAL S S-Metolachlor 915 g/ 

  + Safener EC Syngenta L. 5749 GOLD ®

TABLE 6-100 TRIAL DESIGN Design Completely randomized design ReplicatesFour Plot size 5 m × 2.5 m = Nett/plot

TABLE 6-101 SPRAYER Sprayer CO₂ Precision Sprayer Boom 2.5 m aluminiumNozzle 5 × 11002 flat fan nozzles (Teejet 11002 DG) Pressure 3.0 BarApplication 200  

 /ha

Spray Water Quality:

pH: 6.5EC: 0.6 mS/m

TABLE 6-102 WEATHER INFORMATION AT APPLICATION: Temperature (max) 30.4°C. RH: 35% Wind: 0-5 km/h, Variable Cloud 8/8

TABLE 6-103 SOIL PROPERTIES AT APPLICATION Clay Fraction 10.3% SiltFraction  5.8% Sand Fraction 94.8% pH (H₂O) 7.3 Moisture Surface dry,subsurface moist at 5 cm Seedbed condition Fine (no clods)

Irrigation: Sprinkler Crop: Crop: Maize Variety: Phb 32 D 68 BR

Growth stage: Pre-emergence (BBCH growth stage 00)Sowing depth: 5 cmSowing density: 90000 plants/ha

TABLE 6-104 WEED INFORMATION: SPECIES COMMON NAME ABBREVIATION Daturaferox Large thornapple DATFE Portulaca oleracea Purslane POROL Schkuhriapinnata Dwarf marigold SCHPI Bidens pilosa Blackjack BIDPI

TABLE 6-105 ASSESSMENT DETAILS Method Comparative Efficacy HerbicideEfficacy: Number of weeds in treated versus untreated plots Selectivity:3. Visual phytotoxicity: BBA 1-9 scale (refer to appendix for details)4. Yield: 20 cobs harvested at random from each plot. Average grainweight per plot determined using a precision 2 decimal scale.Statistical evaluation: ANOVA at the 95% probability using Tukeys LSDformulae Assessment 14 DAA-Efficacy/Selectivity Times-Days 28DAA-Efficacy/Selectivity After 42 DAA-Efficacy/Selectivity Application56 DAA-Efficacy (DAA) Harvest-Selectivity

TABLE 6-106 Comparative yield of DINAMIC ® 700WDG programs YIELD(Kg/plot) Replicate TREATMENT I II III IV Mean 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago 2.341.83 1.79 1.86 1.95 a  75 g + 100 ml 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago 2.10 2.36 1.962.45 2.21 ab 75 g + 150 ml 0 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 2.32 1.97 2.41 2.182.22 ab 100 g + 100 ml 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago 2.08 1.96 2.29 2.26 2.15 ab100 g + 150 ml 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago 2.12 2.45 1.86 2.30 2.18 ab 125 g +100 ml 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago 1.97 1.81 2.02 1.90 1.92 a  125 g + 150 ml 7DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 2.72 2.31 2.00 2.33 2.34 ab 75 g + 100ml + 1.0 l 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 2.49 1.75 2.07 2.21 2.13 ab75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 2.11 1.74 1.872.07 1.95 a  100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S2.81 1.98 2.00 2.37 2.29 ab 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 11 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 840S 1.84 2.53 2.20 2.19 2.19 ab 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 2.99 2.29 2.94 2.37 2.65 b  125 g +150 ml + 1.0 l 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 2.96 2.47 2.38 2.432.56 b  250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l 14 CALLISTO ® + Dual Gold 2.55 1.93 2.252.09 2.20 ab 260 ml + 710 ml 15 Untreated control 2.30 2.00 2.25 2.062.15 ab Note: Treatment means sharing the same letter do not differsignificantly by LSD test at the 5% (α = 0.05) level of probability

TABLE 6-107 Comparative visual phytotoxicity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpre-emergence programs BBA VISUAL PHYTOTOXICITY SCALE (1 - no damage;9 - dead) Replicate TREATMENT Timing I II III IV Mean 1 DINAMIC ® +Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 100 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 2DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 150 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 11 1.0 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 2 2 2 2 2.0 100 g + 100 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.042 1 1 1 1 1.0 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 3 3 2.0 100 g + 150 ml 28 1 11 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 3 2 3 1 2.5 125 g + 100ml 28 3 2 3 2 2.5 42 2 1 2 1 1.5 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 3 1 1 3 2.0 125g + 150 ml 28 3 3 3 3 1.0 42 2 2 2 2 1.0 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA840S 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.08 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 3 3 22 2.5 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 28 3 3 3 3 3.0 42 2 1 1 2 1.5 10DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 4 3 3 3 3.25 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l28 4 3 2 3 3.0 42 3 1 1 2 1.75 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 3 31 3 2.66 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 12DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 4 3 3 3 3.25 125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l28 3 3 2 1 2.25 42 2 2 1 1 1.5 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 14 5 55 5 5.0 250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l 28 6 6 4 4 5.0 42 4 4 4 4 4.0 14CALLISTO ® + Dual Gold 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 260 ml + 710 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 421 1 1 1 1.0 15 Untreated control 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 11 1.0

TABLE 6-108 Comparative herbicidal activity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpre-emergence programs AVERAGE % WEED CONTROL BY SPECIES % C = Visual %weed control % P = Visual % weed pressure DATE POROL SCHPI BIDPI % % % %% % % % TREATMENT Timing C P C P C P C P 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 95 1099 5 100 3 100 3 75 g + 100 ml 28 95 15 96 10 99 7 98 5 42 85 25 90 1596 10 90 7 56 80 35 80 20 96 15 80 15 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 100 5 10010 100 5 100 3 75 g + 150 ml 28 98 10 100 15 100 5 100 5 42 98 15 99 2099 10 96 7 56 98 30 97 25 99 15 94 10 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 100 10 1001 100 1 100 3 100 g + 100 ml 28 100 15 100 3 100 1 100 5 42 97 25 100 5100 3 95 7 56 95 35 99 15 99 5 85 10 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 100 10 1005 100 3 100 1 100 g + 150 ml 28 100 20 100 10 100 5 100 3 42 98 25 10015 100 10 99 5 56 96 30 99 20 99 15 98 7 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 100 5100 10 100 5 100 3 125 g + 100 ml 28 99 10 100 15 100 5 100 5 42 97 1599 20 99 10 95 7 56 95 30 97 25 99 15 90 10 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1005 100 5 100 1 100 1 125 g + 150 ml 28 100 15 100 10 100 1 100 1 42 10025 100 15 99 3 99 3 56 99 30 97 20 99 5 99 5 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14100 10 100 3 100 1 100 3 TOLLA 840S 28 99 15 100 5 100 1 100 5 75 g +100 ml + 1.0 l 42 99 20 99 10 99 3 95 7 56 97 25 99 15 97 7 90 10 8DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 100 3 100 1 100 10 100 3 TOLLA 840S 28 100 5 1003 100 10 100 5 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 42 98 10 99 10 100 15 98 10 56 9620 99 15 99 20 96 15 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 100 5 100 3 100 1 100 3TOLLA 840S 28 100 10 100 10 100 3 100 3 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 42 95 2097 15 99 3 98 5 56 93 30 95 25 99 5 96 5 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 1005 100 1 100 1 100 1 TOLLA 840S 28 100 15 100 5 100 1 100 3 100 g + 150ml + 1.0 l 42 98 25 99 10 99 3 100 3 56 96 35 99 30 99 5 99 7 11DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 100 5 100 5 100 1 100 1 TOLLA 840S 28 100 12 10010 100 1 100 3 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 42 99 15 10 15 99 3 96 5 56 98 2599 20 99 5 94 10 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 100 10 100 5 100 1 100 1TOLLA 840S 28 100 20 100 10 100 3 100 3 125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 42 99 2599 15 100 5 99 5 56 97 30 97 25 99 10 99 10 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14100 1 100 3 100 1 100 1 TOLLA 840S 28 100 5 100 5 100 5 100 3 250 g +300 ml + 2.0 l 42 99 15 100 10 100 5 100 5 56 99 30 100 15 100 7 100 1514 CALLISTO ® + DUAL S 14 100 5 100 1 100 1 100 3 GOLD ® 28 99 15 100 5100 3 100 5 260 ml + 710 ml 42 99 25 100 10 100 7 98 10 56 98 35 100 15100 15 96 15 15 Untreated control 14 0 10 0 1 0 1 0 3 28 0 20 0 3 0 3 05 42 0 30 0 5 0 5 0 10 56 0 40 0 10 0 10 0 15

The trial was conducted on a commercial maize crop produced underirrigated conditions. The DINAMIC® 700WDG formulation was evaluated forherbicidal activity and crop selectivity when applied as a pre-emergencespray program in tank-mix combination with Galago and TOLLA 840S.Treatments were applied pre-emergence of crop and weeds as broadcastapplications over the maize rows. Weather conditions were dry withinfrequent showers of rain occurring for the duration of the trial.

Visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting and yellowingwere observed in treatments receiving the DINAMIC® 700WDG formulationapplied at the rates of 100 g/ha and 125 g/ha in combination with Galagoand Galago+TOLLA 840S at 14 DAA. Visual symptoms of phytotoxicity weredosage related and ranged from negligible to moderate (class 2 to class3) according to the BBA visual phytotoxicity rating scale (refer toappendix for details on scale). Slight chlorosis (yellowing) was onlyobserved at 14 DAA. Visual symptoms of stunting were observed at theassessments conducted at 14, 28 and 42 DAA with a decrease in severityof stunting observed at the final visual phytotoxicity assessmentconducted at 42 DAA.

The tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S applied atthe double rate of 250 g/ha+300 m

/ha+2.0

/ha exhibited visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stuntingand slight yellowing (chlorosis) at the assessment conducted at 14 DAA.At the assessment conducted at 28 DAA, visual symptoms of stuntingcorresponding to a BBA scale of 5 (Commercially acceptable only undercircumstances where yield losses do not occur) were observed. While at42 DAA, severity of stunting improved from class 5 to class 4 accordingto the BBA visual phytotoxicity assessment scale.

Yield

None of the various DINAMIC® 700WDG tank-mix combinations exhibitedsignificantly different yields in terms of grain yield per plot comparedto the untreated control treatment or the standard tank-mix combinationof CALLISTO®+DUAL S GOLD®, respectively.

The weed spectrum at the trial site consisted of broadleaved weeds only.The broadleaved weed spectrum was composed of Large thornapple (DATFE),Purslane (POROL), Dwarf marigold (SCHPI) and Blackjack (BIDPI). Efficacyevaluations were conducted at 14, 28, 42 and 56 days followingapplication, respectively.

DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago

The tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago were efficacious anddisplayed excellent levels of herbicidal activity against thebroadleaved weed spectrum at the trial site. Commercially acceptablelevels of herbicidal activity were achieved across the entire weedspectrum where DINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at rates exceeding 75 g/ha incombination with Galago applied at either 100 m

/ha or 150 m

/ha, respectively. Commercial control of the entire broadleaved weedspectrum was observed in all treatments where Galago was applied at therate of 150 m

/ha, regardless of the rate of DINAMIC® 700WDG applied.

Dinamic® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S

The addition of TOLLA 840S to the tank-mix combination of DINAMIC®700WDG+Galago greatly enhanced the herbicidal activity against thesmall-seeded broadleaved weeds (POROL, SCHPI and BIDPI). All of thetank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S exhibitedcommercially acceptable levels of herbicidal activity against thebroadleaved weeds DATFE, POROL, SCHPI and BIDPI at the final assessmentconducted at 56 DAA. The tank-mix combination of DINAMIC®700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S applied at 100−125 g/ha+150 m

/ha+1.0

/ha achieved comparable levels of herbicidal activity as the standardtank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+Dual Gold applied at 260 m

/ha+710 m

/ha.

Compatibility

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S, whetherapplied at single or double rates.

Visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting were observedon treatments receiving the tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC®700WDG+Galago and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S in all cases whereDINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at rates exceeding 75 g/ha. Visual symptomsof stunting were dosage related and ranged from negligible to distinctdamage (class 2 to class 5) according to the BBA visual phytotoxicityrating scale.

DINAMIC®+Galago combinations displayed commercially acceptable levels ofherbicidal activity against the broadleaved weed spectrum consisting ofDATFE, POROL, SCHPI and BIDPI in all tank-mix treatments where DINAMIC®700WDG was applied at rates exceeding 75 g/ha, or in tank-mix treatmentswhere Galago was applied at the rate of 150 m

/ha.

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S wereefficacious and exhibited commercial control of DATFE, POROL, SCHPI andBIDPI across all rates applied. The tank-mix combination of DINAMIC®700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S applied at 100-125 g/ha+150 m

/ha+1.0

/ha achieved comparable levels of herbicidal activity as the standardtank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+Dual Gold applied at 260 m

/ha+710 m

/ha.

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S, whetherapplied at single or double rates.

None of the various DINAMIC® 700WDG tank-mix combinations exhibitedsignificantly different yields in terms of grain yield per plot comparedto the untreated control treatment or the standard tank-mix combinationof CALLISTO®+DUAL S GOLD®, respectively.

TABLE 6-109 Anova Table Grain yield (kg/plot) Degrees of Sums of Mean FUnit freedom Squares Squares Value Reps 3 .6917 Treatments 14 2.269.1621 2.969 Error 42 2.293 .5459 Total 59 5.253 Overall mean 2.207 S.Efor Difference .1652 Least Significant Difference (LSD) at 95% .3334

TABLE 6-110 BBA Visual Phytotoxicity rating scale EQUIVALENT Scale %Description 1 0% NO DAMAGE 2 0.1-2.5% NEGLIGIBLE DAMAGE 3 2.5-5.0%MODERATE DAMAGE No effects on yield and/or quality 4 5.0-10%  Damage upto limits of commercial acceptability-if no yield loss 5 10-15% DISTINCTDAMAGE Commercially acceptable only under certain conditions-if no yieldloss 6 15-25% SEVERE DAMAGE Not commercially acceptable-yield loss andquality 7 25-35% VERY SEVERE DAMAGE 8 35-68% EXTREME DAMAGE 9  68-100%START OF WITHERING AND DEATH

O. Pre Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

This Example compares the herbicidal selectivity and efficacy ofDINAMIC® 700WDG applied in combination with Galago and TOLLA 840S as apre-emergence application with regards to both crop and weeds inirrigated maize. Treatments and conditions are tabulated below.

TABLE 6-111 TREATMENTS Rate/ha TREATMENT Product ( 

 ) a.i. (g) 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago  75 g + 100 m 

  52.5 + 48   2 DINAMIC ® + Galago  75 g + 150 m 

  52.5 + 72   3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 100 g + 100 m 

  70 + 48 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago 100 g + 150 m 

  70 + 72 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago 125 g + 100 m 

  87.5 + 48   6 DINAMIC ® + Galago 125 g + 150 m 

  87.5 + 72   7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S  75 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

  52.5 + 48 + 840 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S  75 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

  52.5 + 72 + 840 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 100 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

    70 + 48 + 840 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 100 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

    70 + 72 + 840 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 125 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

  87.5 + 48 + 840 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 125 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

  87.5 + 72 + 840 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 840S 250 g + 300 m 

  + 2.0  

  175 + 144 + 1680 14 CALLISTO ® + Dual Gold 260 m 

  + 710 m 

  125 + 650 15 Untreated control — —

TABLE 6-112 Test products used Manufacturer/ Product Active IngredientForm Supplier Reg. No. 1 DINAMIC ® Amicarbazone 700 g/kg WDG ArystaLifescience 700WDG 2 Galago Mesotrione 480 g/ 

  SC Arysta Lifescience L. 8089 3 TOLLA 840 S Metolachlor 840 g/ 

  + Safener EC Arysta Lifescience L. 7374 4 CALLISTO ® Mesotrione 480g/ 

  SC Syngenta L. 6795 5 DUAL S S-Metolachlor 915 g/ 

  + Safener EC Syngenta L. 5749 GOLD ®

TABLE 6-113 TRIAL DESIGN Design Completely randomized design ReplicatesFour Plot size 5 m × 2 m = Nett/plot

TABLE 6-114 SPRAYER Sprayer CO₂ Precision Sprayer Boom 2.0 m aluminiumNozzle 4 × 11002 flat fan nozzles (Teejet 11002 DG) Pressure 2.55 BarApplication 200  

 /ha

Spray Water Quality:

pH: 6.6EC: 0.5 mS/m

TABLE 6-115 WEATHER INFORMATION AT APPLICATION Temperature (max) 31.6°C. RH: 34% Wind: 0-5 km/h, NW Cloud 8/8

TABLE 6-116 SOIL PROPERTIES AT APPLICATION: Clay Fraction  9% SiltFraction  5% Sand Fraction 86% pH (H₂O) 6.01 Moisture Field capacitySeedbed condition Fine (no clods)

Irrigation: Sprinkler Crop: Crop: Maize Variety: Pan 3P-736BR

Growth stage: Pre-emergence (BBCH growth stage 00)Sowing depth: 5 cm

TABLE 6-117 WEED INFORMATION: SPECIES COMMON NAME ABBREVIATION Bidenspilosa Blackjack BIDPI Portulaca oleracea Purslane POROL Convolvulusarvensis Field bindweed CONAR Anoda cristata Anoda weed ANOCR

TABLE 6-118 ASSESSMENT DETAILS Method Comparative Efficacy HerbicideEfficacy: Number of weeds in treated versus untreated plots Selectivity:5. Visual phytotoxicity: BBA 1-9 scale (refer to appendix for details)6. Yield: 40 cobs harvested at random from each plot. Average grainweight per plot determined using a precision 2 decimal scale.Statistical evaluation: ANOVA at the 95% probability using Tukeys LSDformulae Assessment 14 DAA-Efficacy/Selectivity Times-Days 28DAA-Efficacy/Selectivity After 42 DAA-Efficacy/Selectivity Application56 DAA-Efficacy (DAA) Harvest-Selectivity

TABLE 6-119 Comparative yield of DINAMIC ® 700WDG programs YIELD(Kg/plot) Replicate TREATMENT I II III IV Mean 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago 4.063.52 4.59 4.22 4.10 a 75 g + 100 ml 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago 3.59 3.21 3.904.19 3.72 a 75 g + 150 ml 0 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 4.30 3.43 3.97 3.913.90 a 100 g + 100 ml 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago 3.47 3.00 3.70 3.56 3.43 a100 g + 150 ml 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago 3.68 3.04 4.01 3.69 3.61 a 125 g +100 ml 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago 3.69 3.34 3.59 3.78 3.60 a 125 g + 150 ml 7DINAMIC ® + Galago + 3.64 3.16 3.48 4.37 3.66 a TOLLA 840S 75 g + 100ml + 1.0 l 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 3.01 3.45 3.56 4.82 3.71 a TOLLA 840S75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 3.52 3.22 4.00 3.90 3.66 aTOLLA 840S 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 3.91 4.20 3.503.91 3.88 a TOLLA 840S 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago +3.71 4.84 3.58 3.48 3.90 a TOLLA 840S 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 12DINAMIC ® + Galago + 3.36 3.54 4.75 3.95 3.90 a TOLLA 840S 125 g + 150ml + 1.0 l 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 3.49 3.85 4.42 3.48 3.81 a TOLLA 840S250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l 14 CALLISTO ® + Dual Gold 3.73 4.40 4.09 4.064.07 a 260 ml + 710 ml 15 Untreated control 4.00 4.32 4.37 4.02 4.18 aNote: Treatment means sharing the same letter do not differsignificantly by LSD test at the 5% (α = 0.05) level of probability

TABLE 6-120 Comparative visual phytotoxicity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpre-emergence programs BBA VISUAL PHYTOTOXICITY SCALE (1 - no damage;9 - dead) Replicate TREATMENT Timing I II III IV Mean 1 DINAMIC ® +Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 100 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 2DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 150 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 11 1.0 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 100 g + 100 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.042 1 1 1 1 1.0 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 100 g + 150 ml 28 1 11 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 125 g + 100ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 125g + 150 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 1 1 11 1.0 TOLLA 840S 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 8DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 TOLLA 840S 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 150ml + 1.0 l 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 TOLLA840S 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 10 DINAMIC ® +Galago + 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 TOLLA 840S 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l42 1 1 1 1 1.0 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 3 3 1 1 2.0 TOLLA 840S 28 1 11 1 1.0 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 143 1 1 3 2.0 TOLLA 840S 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 42 1 1 1 11.0 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 3 2 1 3 2.25 TOLLA 840S 28 2 2 1 2 1.75250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l 42 4 4 1 2 2.75 14 CALLISTO ® + Dual Gold 14 1 11 1 1.0 260 ml + 710 ml 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0 15 Untreatedcontrol 14 1 1 1 1 1.0 28 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 1 1 1 1 1.0

TABLE 6-121 Comparative herbicidal activity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpre-emergence programs AVERAGE % WEED CONTROL BY SPECIES % C = Visual %weed control % P = Visual % weed pressure BIDPI POROL ANOCR CONAR % % %% % % % % TREATMENT Timing C P C P C P C P 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 100 5100 3 100 1 100 1 75 g + 100 ml 28 100 10 100 10 100 3 100 1 42 96 15100 15 80 5 100 3 56 85 20 90 25 70 10 80 10 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14 1005 100 5 100 1 100 1 75 g + 150 ml 28 100 10 100 10 100 3 100 3 42 100 15100 15 100 5 100 7 56 94 20 98 20 90 10 90 10 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago 14100 5 100 1 100 1 100 2 100 g + 100 ml 28 100 10 100 3 98 5 100 5 42 10020 100 5 100 10 100 10 56 90 25 98 15 90 10 85 10 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago14 100 3 100 3 100 1 100 1 100 g + 150 ml 28 100 5 100 5 100 1 100 1 42100 10 100 10 100 3 100 3 56 98 15 99 20 98 5 96 5 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago14 100 1 100 1 100 1 100 1 125 g + 100 ml 28 100 5 100 5 100 1 100 1 42100 10 100 10 100 3 100 3 56 96 15 98 15 96 7 94 5 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago14 100 5 100 1 100 1 100 2 125 g + 150 ml 28 100 10 100 3 100 3 100 5 42100 15 100 5 100 5 100 10 56 99 20 99 15 98 10 98 10 7 DINAMIC ® +Galago + 14 100 5 100 3 100 1 100 2 TOLLA 840S 28 100 10 100 5 90 3 1005 75 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 42 94 20 100 10 90 5 100 7 56 90 25 98 20 80 1090 10 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 100 3 100 3 100 1 100 2 TOLLA 840S 28100 5 100 5 100 3 100 5 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 42 100 10 100 10 100 5 10010 56 99 20 99 20 90 10 94 10 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 100 5 100 3 1002 100 1 TOLLA 840S 28 100 10 100 5 96 5 100 1 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 4296 20 100 10 96 10 100 3 56 96 25 96 20 90 10 90 5 10 DINAMIC ® +Galago + 14 100 3 100 1 100 1 100 1 TOLLA 840S 28 100 5 100 3 100 1 1003 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 42 100 10 100 5 100 3 100 5 56 99 20 98 15 94 794 10 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 100 5 100 1 100 1 100 1 TOLLA 840S 28100 10 100 3 100 1 98 3 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l 42 99 15 100 5 100 3 90 356 98 20 100 15 96 10 90 10 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 14 100 5 100 3 100 2100 2 TOLLA 840S 28 100 10 100 5 100 5 100 5 125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l 42100 15 100 10 100 10 100 10 56 100 20 100 20 98 15 96 12 13 DINAMIC ® +Galago + 14 100 5 100 3 100 0 100 1 TOLLA 840S 28 100 10 100 5 100 0 1003 250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l 42 100 20 100 10 100 1 100 5 56 100 25 100 20100 5 100 10 14 CALLISTO ® + DUAL S 14 100 1 100 1 100 1 100 2 GOLD ® 28100 5 100 3 100 3 100 5 260 ml + 710 ml 42 100 10 100 5 100 5 100 10 56100 15 100 15 100 10 100 10 15 Untreated control 14 0 5 0 1 0 1 0 1 28 010 0 3 0 3 0 3 42 0 15 0 5 0 5 0 5 56 0 20 0 15 0 10 0 10

The trial was conducted on a commercial maize crop produced underirrigated conditions. The DINAMIC® 700WDG formulation was evaluated forherbicidal activity and crop selectivity when applied as a pre-emergencespray program in tank-mix combination with Galago and TOLLA 840S.Treatments were applied pre-emergence of crop and weeds as broadcastapplications over the maize rows.

No visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting, chlorosisor growth abnormalities were observed on any of the treatments receivingthe tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago across all ratesapplied.

The tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S exhibitedsymptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting in treatmentsreceiving the DINAMIC® 700WDG formulation applied at the rate of 125g/ha and the double rate of 250 g/ha, respectively. At 125 g/ha,stunting was only observed at the first assessment conducted at 14 DAA.At the double rate of 250 g/ha, stunting was observed at each of theassessments conducted. No visual symptoms of phytotoxicity were observedin tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S where theDINAMIC® 700WDG formulation was applied at rates of 75 g/ha and 100g/ha, respectively.

In terms of yield, tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago andDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S did not significantly increase ordecrease yield compared to the untreated control treatments and thestandard tank-mix combination of

CALLISTO®+DUAL S GOLD@.

The weed spectrum at the trial site consisted mainly of broadleavedweeds namely; Blackjack (BIDPI), Purslane (POROL), Anoda weed (ANOCR)and Field bindweed (CONAR). Efficacy evaluations were conducted at 14,28, 42 and 56 days following application, respectively. Blackjack(BIDPI) and Purslane (POROL) were well represented in each plot with15-25% soil cover of each weed observed in the untreated control stripsat the final assessment, respectively. The weeds ANOCR and CONARrepresented a smaller portion of the weed population with 5-15% and5-10% soil cover of each weed observed in the untreated control stripsat the final assessment conducted at 56 DAA, respectively.

DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago

The tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago exhibitedcommercially acceptable levels of herbicidal activity against thebroadleaved weed POROL across all rates applied. Commercially acceptablelevels of herbicidal activity were achieved for BIDPI and ANOCR whereDINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at rates exceeding 75 g/ha in combinationwith Galago applied at either 100 m

/ha or 150 m

/ha, respectively. Generally, weed control was greatest with increasingrates of Galago applied and commercial control of the entire broadleavedweed spectrum was observed in all treatments where Galago was applied atthe rate of 150 m

/ha, regardless of the rate of DINAMIC® 700WDG applied.

DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S

The addition of TOLLA 840S to the tank-mix combination of DINAMIC®700WDG+Galago greatly enhanced the herbicidal activity against thesmall-seeded broadleaved weeds (POROL and BIDPI). All of the tank-mixcombinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S exhibited commerciallyacceptable levels of herbicidal activity against the broadleaved weedsBIDPI, POROL and CONAR at the final assessment conducted at 56 DAA. Thebroadleaved weed CONAR was commercially controlled by all tank-mixcombinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S where Galago wasapplied at the rate of 150 m

/ha or where the rate of DINAMIC® 700WDG exceeded 75 g/ha. The tank-mixcombination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S applied at 125 g/ha+150m

/ha+1.0

/ha achieved comparable levels of herbicidal activity as the standardtank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+Dual Gold applied at 260 m

/ha+710 m

/ha.

Compatibility

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S, whetherapplied at single or double rates.

No visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting, chlorosisor growth abnormalities were observed on any of the treatments receivingthe tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago across all ratesapplied. DINAMIC®+Galago tank-mix combinations displayed commerciallyacceptable levels of herbicidal activity against the broadleaved weedPOROL across all rates applied, while commercially acceptable levels ofherbicidal activity were observed for BIDPI and ANOCR where DINAMIC®700WDG was applied at rates exceeding 75 g/ha in combination with Galagoapplied at either 100 m

/ha or 150 m

/ha.

The tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S exhibitedsymptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting in treatmentsreceiving the DINAMIC® 700WDG formulation applied at the rate of 125g/ha and the double rate of 250 g/ha, respectively. No visual symptomsof phytotoxicity were observed in tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC®700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S where the DINAMIC® 700WDG formulation wasapplied at rates of 75 g/ha and 100 g/ha, respectively.

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S wereefficacious and exhibited commercial control of BIDPI, POROL and CONARacross all rates applied. CONAR was commercially controlled by alltank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S where Galagowas applied at the rate of 150 m

/ha or where the rate of DINAMIC® 700WDG exceeded 75 g/ha. The tank-mixcombination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S applied at 125 g/ha+150m

/ha+1.0

/ha achieved comparable levels of herbicidal activity as the standardtank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+Dual Gold applied at 260 m

/ha+710 m

/ha.

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S, whetherapplied at single or double rates.

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago and DINAMIC®700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 840S did not significantly increase or decreaseyield compared to the untreated control treatments and the standardtank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+DUAL S GOLD®.

TABLE 6-122 Anova Table Grain yield (kg/plot) Degrees of Sums of Mean FUnit freedom Squares Squares Value Reps 3 1.416 Treatments 14 2.4240.1731 0.9727 Error 42 7.476 0.1780 Total 59 11.32 Overall mean 3.809S.E for Difference 0.2983 Least Significant Difference (LSD) at 95%0.6020

TABLE 6-123 BBA Visual Phytotoxicity rating scale EQUIVALENT Scale %Description 1 0% NO DAMAGE 2 0.1-2.5% NEGLIGIBLE DAMAGE 3 2.5-5.0%MODERATE DAMAGE No effects on yield and/or quality 4 5.0-10%  Damage upto limits of commercial acceptability-if no yield loss 5 10-15% DISTINCTDAMAGE Commercially acceptable only under certain conditions-if no yieldloss 6 15-25% SEVERE DAMAGE Not commercially acceptable-yield loss andquality 7 25-35% VERY SEVERE DAMAGE 8 35-68% EXTREME DAMAGE 9  68-100%START OF WITHERING AND DEATH

P. Post Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

This Example compares the herbicidal selectivity and efficacy ofDINAMIC® 700WDG applied in combination with Galago and TOLLA 960 as apost-emergence application with regards to both crop and weeds inirrigated maize. Treatments and conditions are tabulated below.

TABLE 6-124 TREATMENTS Rate/ha TREATMENT Product ( 

 ) a.i. (g) 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All  75 g + 100 m 

  + 100 m 

 /100  

  52.5 + 48 + 180 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All  75 g + 150 m 

  + 100 m 

 /100  

  52.5 + 72 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 100 g + 100 m 

  + 100 m 

 /100  

    70 + 48 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 100 g + 150 m 

  + 100 m 

 /100  

    70 + 72 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 125 g + 100 m 

  + 100 m 

 /100  

  87.5 + 48 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 125 g + 150 m 

  + 100 m 

 /100  

  87.5 + 72 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 75 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

  + 52.5 + 48 + 960 + Wet-All 100 m 

 /100  

  180 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 75 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

  + 52.5 + 72 + 960 + Wet-All 100 m 

 /100  

  180 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 100 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

 + 70 + 48 + 960 + 180 Wet-All 100 m 

 /100  

  10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 100 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

 + 70 + 72 + 960 + 180 Wet-All 100 m 

 /100  

  11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 125 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

 + 87.5 + 48 + 960 + Wet-All 100 m 

 /100  

  180 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 125 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

 + 87.5 + 72 + 960 + Wet-All 100 m 

 /100  

  180 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 250 g + 300 m 

  + 2.0  

 + 175 + 144 + 1920 + Wet-All 200 m 

 /100  

  360 14 CALLISTO ® + Gardo Gold + 260 m 

 + 1562 m 

 + 100 m 

  125 + 488/293 + Complement super 100 15 Untreated control — —

TABLE 6-125 Test products used Manufacturer/ Registration Product ActiveIngredient Formulation Supplier No. 1 DINAMIC ® Amicarbazone 700 g/kgWDG Arysta Lifescience 700WDG 2 Galago Mesotrione 480 g/ 

  SC Arysta Lifescience L. 8089 3 TOLLA 960 Metolachlor 960 g/ 

  EC Arysta Lifescience L. 6794 4 Wet-All Adjuvant SL Arysta LifescienceL. 8361 5 CALLISTO ® Mesotrione 480 g/ 

  SC Syngenta L. 6795 6 Gardo Gold S-Metolachlor 312.5 SC Syngenta L.7763 g/ 

  Terbuthylazine 187.5 g/ 

  7 COMPLEMENT ® Adjuvant SL Syngenta L. 8169 Super

TABLE 6-126 TRIAL DESIGN Design Completely randomized design ReplicatesFour Plot size 5 m × 2.5 m = Nett/plot

TABLE 6-127 SPRAYER Sprayer CO₂ Precision Sprayer Boom 2 m aluminiumNozzle 5 × 11002 flat fan nozzles (Teejet 11002 DG) Pressure 2.7 BarApplication 200  

/ha

Spray Water Quality:

pH: 6.5EC: 0.7 mS/m

Spray Volume:

200

/ha at 2.7 Bar

TABLE 6-128 WEATHER INFORMATION AT APPLICATION Temperature (max) 25.9°C. RH: 57% Wind: 0-5 km/h, W Cloud 7/8

TABLE 6-129 SOIL PROPERTIES AT APPLICATION Clay Fraction 10.3% SiltFraction  5.8% Sand Fraction 94.8% pH (KCl) 7.3 Moisture Field capacity(one day after irrigation)

Irrigation:

None (rain-fed)

Crop: Crop: Maize Variety: Phb 32 P 68 R

Growth stage: 4-5 leaf (BBCH growth stage 14/15)Sowing depth: 5 cmSowing density: 90 000 plants/ha

TABLE 6-130 WEED INFORMATION COMMON GROWTH % SOIL SPECIES NAME CODESTAGE COVER Datura ferox Large thornapple DATFE 2-4 leaf 20% Portulacaoleracea Purslane POROL 8-12 leaf + 2  5% sideshoots Schkuhria pinnataDwarf marigold SCHPI 2-6 leaf 10% Bidens pilosa Blackjack BIDPI 4-12leaf + 2  5% sideshoots

TABLE 6-131 ASSESSMENT DETAILS Method Comparative Efficacy HerbicideEfficacy: Number of weeds in treated versus untreated plots Selectivity:Visual phytotoxicity and yield 7. Visual phytotoxicity: BBA 1-9 scale(refer to appendix for details) 8. Yield: 20 cobs harvested at randomfrom each plot. Average grain weight per plot determined using aprecision 2 decimal scale. Statistical evaluation: ANOVA at the 95%probability using Tukeys LSD formulae Assessment 14 DAA -Efficacy/Selectivity Times-Days 28 DAA - Efficacy/Selectivity After 56DAA - Efficacy/Selectivity Application Harvest - Selectivity (DAA)

TABLE 6-132 Comparative yield of DINAMIC ® 700WDG programs YIELD(Kg/plot) Replicate TREATMENT I II III IV Mean 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago +Wet-All 2.04 2.13 2.30 1.60 2.02 a 75 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 l 2DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 2.31 2.31 2.31 1.72 2.16 a 75 g + 150 ml +100 ml/100 l 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 2.62 1.95 2.27 1.79 2.16 a100 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 l 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 2.49 1.972.39 1.93 2.20 a 100 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 l 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago +Wet-All 2.09 2.27 2.37 2.07 2.20 a 125 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 l 6DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 2.35 2.17 1.84 2.22 2.14 a 125 g + 150 ml +100 ml/100 l 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 2.61 1.88 2.23 2.12 2.21a Wet-All 75 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago +TOLLA 960 + 2.33 2.03 2.05 1.91 2.08 a Wet-All 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l +100 ml/100 l 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 2.20 1.92 2.66 1.96 2.18a Wet-All 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago +TOLLA 960 + 2.21 2.24 2.31 2.58 2.34 a Wet-All 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l +100 ml/100 l 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 1.84 2.03 2.63 2.802.33 a Wet-All 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 12 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 960 + 1.50 2.29 2.19 2.74 2.18 a Wet-All 125 g + 150 ml +1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 1.57 1.92 1.902.07 1.87 a Wet-All 250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l + 200 ml/100 l 14CALLISTO ® + Gardo Gold + 1.80 2.64 2.85 2.52 2.46 a COMPLIMENT ® Super260 ml + 1562 ml + 100 ml/100 l 15 Untreated control 2.12 2.67 2.68 2.452.48 a

TABLE 6-133 Comparative visual phytotoxicity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpost-emergence programs BBA VISUAL PHYTOTOXICITY SCALE (1 - no damage;9 - dead) Replicate TREATMENT Timing I II III IV Mean 1 DINAMIC ® +Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 1 11 1 1.0 75 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 11.0 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 100 g + 100 ml +100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 4 DINAMIC ® +Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 100 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA1 1 1 1 1.0 125 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 11 1 1.0 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 3 1 1 3 2.0 125 g + 150ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 7 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 Wet-All 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 75g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 8 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 Wet-All 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 75g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 9 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 Wet-All 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 100g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 10 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.5 Wet-All 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 100g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 11 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 3 3 1 1 2.0 Wet-All 28 DAA 2 3 1 1 1.75 125g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 12 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 3 3 1 1 2.0 Wet-All 28 DAA 2 2 1 1 1.5 125g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 13 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 5 6 6 5 5.5 Wet-All 28 DAA 3 4 4 3 3.5 250g + 300 ml + 2.0 l + 200 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 2 3 3 2 2.5 14 CALLISTO ® +Gardo Gold + 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 COMPLEMENT ® Super 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0260 ml + 1562 ml + 100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 15 Untreated control 14 DAA1 1 1 1 1.0 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 Note: Treatment meanssharing the same letter do not differ significantly by LSD test at the5% (α = 0.05) level of probability

TABLE 6-134 Comparative visual phytotoxicity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpost-emergence programs AVERAGE % WEED CONTROL BY SPECIES TREATMENTTiming DATFE SCHPI POROL CYPES 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 99100 60 30 75 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 100 100 40 40 56 DAA 100100 30 30 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 100 100 70 50 75 g + 150ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 100 100 50 70 56 DAA 100 100 30 50 3DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 99 100 65 35 100 g + 100 ml + 100ml/100 ml 28 DAA 100 100 50 40 56 DAA 100 100 35 35 4 DINAMIC ® +Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 100 100 70 55 100 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28DAA 100 100 60 70 56 DAA 100 100 40 50 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14DAA 100 100 70 40 125 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 100 100 60 50 56DAA 100 100 50 40 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 100 100 75 40125 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 100 100 70 70 56 DAA 100 100 55 607 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100 100 70 40 Wet-All 28 DAA100 100 55 50 75 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 56 DAA 100 100 45 408 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100 100 75 60 Wet-All 28 DAA100 100 65 80 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 56 DAA 100 100 50 709 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100 100 75 50 Wet-All 28 DAA100 100 75 60 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 56 DAA 100 100 6045 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100 100 80 65 Wet-All 28DAA 100 100 75 80 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 56 DAA 100 10065 70 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100 100 80 50 Wet-All28 DAA 100 100 80 70 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 56 DAA 100100 70 55 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100 100 85 60Wet-All 28 DAA 100 100 85 85 125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 56DAA 100 100 80 70 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100 100 10070 Wet-All 28 DAA 100 100 100 95 250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l + 200 ml/100 ml56 DAA 100 100 100 90 14 CALLISTO ® + Gardo Gold + 14 DAA 100 100 85 65COMPLEMENT ® Super 28 DAA 100 100 90 90 260 ml + 1562 ml + 100 ml 56 DAA100 100 90 90 15 Untreated Control 14 DAA 0 0 0 0 28 DAA 0 0 0 0 56 DAA0 0 0 0

The trial was conducted on a commercial maize crop produced undersprinkler irrigation. The DINAMIC® 700WDG formulation was evaluated forherbicidal activity and crop selectivity when applied as apost-emergence spray program in tank-mix combination with Galago andTOLLA 960. The adjuvant Wet-All was applied to all treatments receivingDINAMIC® 700WDG as standard practice. Treatments were appliedpost-emergence of crop and weeds as broadcast applications over themaize rows when the maize crop was in the 4-5 leaf stage.

No visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting, chlorosis,necrosis or growth-abnormalities were observed on treatments receivingthe tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-All whereDINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at rates of 75 g/ha and 100 g/ha,respectively. Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-Allapplied at rates of 125 g/ha+150 m

+100 m

/100 exhibited slight visual symptoms of stunting on isolated plots atthe first assessment only. No visual symptoms of stunting were observedon any of the subsequent evaluations conducted at 28 DAA and 42 DAA,respectively.

Visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting were observedat the assessments conducted at 14 and 28 DAA in treatments receivingthe tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-Allwhere DINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at the rate of 125 g/ha and the doublerate of 250 g/ha. Symptoms of phytotoxicity were not severe and rangedfrom negligible to moderate (BBA visual phytotoxicity rating of 2 to 3)in tank-mix treatments receiving DINAMIC® 700WDG at the rate of 125g/ha. No visual symptoms of phytotoxicity of any nature were observed atthe final assessment conducted at 56 DAA.

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-Allapplied at the double rate of 250 g/ha+300 m

/ha+1.0

/ha+200 m

/100

exhibited distinct symptoms of stunting (BBA class 5-6) at the firstassessment conducted at 14 DAA. Severity of stunting improved at thesubsequent evaluations conducted at 28 DAA (BBA class 3-4) and 56 DAA(BBA class 2-3).

Yield:

None of the various DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-All tank-mixcombinations exhibited a significant reduction in yield compared to theuntreated control and the standard CALLISTO®+Gardo Gold+COMPLEMENT®Super treatments.

The weed spectrum at the trial site was composed of yellow nutsedge(CYPES) and broadleaved weeds namely Large thornapple (DATFE), Dwarfmarigold (SCHPI) and Purslane (POROL). The broadleaved weed POROL was inan advanced growth stage at application and considered to be beyondacceptable post-emergence application size. Efficacy evaluations wereconducted at 14, 28 and 56 days following application, respectively.

DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-all exhibitedcommercially acceptable levels of herbicidal activity against thebroadleaved weeds DATFE and SCHPI across all rates applied. None of thetreatments exhibited commercially acceptable levels of herbicidalactivity against CYPES and POROL.

DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-All wereefficacious and exhibited commercially acceptable levels of herbicidalactivity against the broadleaved weeds DATFE and SCHPI across all ratesapplied. The broadleaved weed POROL was suppressed (efficacy between80-89%) in treatments receiving DINAMIC® 700WDG applied at the rate of125 g/ha in combination with Galago at 150 m

/ha. The double rate of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-All and thestandard tank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+Gardo Gold+COMPLEMENT® Superwere the only treatments to display commercially acceptable levels ofherbicidal activity against yellow nutsedge (CYPES) as a result of thehigher rate of mesotrione in these treatments. The standard tank-mixcombination of CALLISTO®+Gardo Gold+COMPLEMENT® Super applied at 260 m

/ha+1562 m

/ha+100 m

/100

displayed superior levels of herbicidal activity with commercial controlachieved for all weed species at the final assessment conducted at 56DAA.

Compatibility

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-All and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA960+Wet-All, whether applied at single or double rates.

No visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting, chlorosis,necrosis or growth-abnormalities were observed on treatments receivingthe tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-All whereDINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at the rates of 75 g/ha and 100 g/ha.Negligible levels of stunting were observed in treatments receiving thetank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-All at the rate of125 g/ha+150 m

/ha+100 m

/100

at the first assessment only, after which no further symptoms ofphytotoxicity were observed.

Visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting were observedat the assessments conducted at 14 and 28 DAA in treatments receivingthe tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-Allwhere DINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at the rate of 125 g/ha. Stunting wasnot severe and ranged from negligible to moderate according to BBAvisual phytotoxicity scale. Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+GT+TOLLA 960+Wet-All applied at the rate of 250 g/ha+300 m

/ha+1.0

/ha+200 m

/100

exhibited distinct symptoms of stunting (BBA class 5-6) at the firstassessment conducted at 14 DAA. Severity of stunting improved at thesubsequent evaluations conducted at 28 DAA (BBA class 3-4) and 56 DAA(BBA class 2-3).

None of the various DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-All tank-mixcombinations exhibited a significant reduction in yield compared to theuntreated control and the standard CALLISTO®+Gardo Gold+COMPLEMENT®Super treatments.

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-All wereefficacious and exhibited commercially acceptable levels of herbicidalactivity against the broadleaved weeds DATFE and SCHPI across all ratesapplied. Yellow nutsedge (CYPES) was only controlled by the double rateof DINAMIC®+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-All and the standard tank-mixcombination of CALLISTO®+Gardo Gold+COMPLEMENT® Super as a result of thehigher rate of mesotrione in these treatments.

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-All and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA960+Wet-All, whether applied at single or double rates.

TABLE 6-135 Anova Table Grain yield (kg/plot) Degrees of Sums of Mean FUnit freedom Squares Squares Value Reps 3 0.3582 Treatments 14 1.3720.9798 0.9748 Error 42 4.221 0.1005 Total 59 5.951 Overall mean 2.199 S.E for Difference 0.2242 Least Significant Difference (LSD) at 95% 0.4524

TABLE 6-136 BBA Visual Phytotoxicity rating scale EQUIVALENT Scale %Description 1 0% NO DAMAGE 2 0.1-2.5% NEGLIGIBLE DAMAGE 3 2.5-5.0%MODERATE DAMAGE No effects on yield and/or quality 4 5.0-10%  Damage upto limits of commercial acceptability - if no yield loss 5 10-15%DISTINCT DAMAGE Commercially acceptable only under certain conditions-if no yield loss 6 15-25% SEVERE DAMAGE Not commercially acceptable -yield loss and quality 7 25-35% VERY SEVERE DAMAGE 8 35-68% EXTREMEDAMAGE 9  68-100% START OF WITHERING AND DEATH

Q. Post-Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

This Example compares the herbicidal selectivity and efficacy ofDINAMIC® 700WDG applied in combination with Galago and TOLLA 960 as apost-emergence application with regards to both crop and weeds in dryland maize. Treatments and conditions are tabulated below.

Rate/ha TREATMENT Product ( 

) a.i. (g) 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago +  75 g + 100 m 

  + 52.5 + 48 + Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

180 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago +  75 g + 150 m 

  + 52.5 + 72 Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

3 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 100 g + 100 m 

  +   70 + 48 Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

4 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 100 g + 150 m 

  +   70 + 72 Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

5 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 125 g + 100 m 

  + 87.5 + 48 Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

6 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 125 g + 150 m 

  + 87.5 + 72 Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

7 DINAMIC ® + Galago +  75 g + 100 m 

  + 52.5 + 48 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 1.0  

  + 960 + 180 100 m 

/100  

  8 DINAMIC ® + Galago +  75 g + 150 m 

  + 52.5 + 72 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 1.0  

  + 960 + 180 100 m 

/100  

9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 100 g + 100 m 

  + 70 + 48 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 1.0  

  + 960 + 180 100 m 

/100  

10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 100 g + 150 m 

  + 70 + 72 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 1.0  

  + 960 + 180 100 m 

/100  

11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 125 g + 100 m  

 + 87.5 + 48 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 1.0  

  + 960 + 180 100 m 

/100  

12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 125 g + 150 m  

  + 87.5 + 72 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 1.0  

  + 960 + 180 100 m 

/100  

13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 250 g + 300 m  

  + 175 + 144 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 2.0  

  + 1920 + 360 200 m 

/100  

14 CALLISTO ® + Gardo 260 m 

  + 125 + Gold + Complement 1562 m 

  + 488/293 + super 100 m 

/100  

100 15 Untreated control — —

TABLE 6-138 Test products used: Manufacturer/ Registration ProductActive Ingredient Formulation Supplier No. 1 DINAMIC ® Amicarbazone 700g/kg WDG Arysta Lifescicnce 700WDG 2 Galago Mesotrione 480 g/ 

SC Arysta Lifesciencc L. 8089 3 TOLLA 960 Metolachlor 960 g/ 

EC Arysta Lifesciencc L. 6794 4 Wet-All Adjuvant SL Arysta LifescienceL. 8361 5 CALLISTO ® Mesotrione 480 g/ 

SC Syngenta L. 6795 6 Gardo Gold S-Metolachlor 312.5 g/ 

  SC Syngenta L. 7763 Terbuthylazine 187.5 g/ 

7 COMPLEMENT ® Adjuvant SL Syngenta L. 8169 Super

TABLE 6-139 TRIAL DESIGN Design Completely randomized design ReplicatesFour Plot size 5 m × 2.5 m = Nett/plot

TABLE 6-140 SPRAYER Sprayer CO₂ Precision Sprayer Boom 2 m aluminiumNozzle 5 × 11002 flat fan nozzles (Teejet 11002 DG) Pressure 2.7 BarApplication 200  

/ha

Spray Water Quality:

pH: 6.5EC: 0.7 mS/m

Spray Volume:

200

/ha at 2.7 Bar

TABLE 6-141 WEATHER INFORMATION AT APPLICATION Time: 10:00 Temperature(max) 28.3° C. RH: 44% Wind: 0-5 km/h, NE Cloud 3/8

TABLE 6-142 SOIL PROPERTIES AT APPLICATION Clay Fraction 16.0% SiltFraction  3.5% Sand Fraction 80.5% pH (KCl) 5.1 Moisture Surface dry,subsurface moist at 6 cm

Irrigation:

None (rain-fed)

Crop: Crop: Maize Variety: Phb 31 G 54 BR

Growth stage: 6-7 leaf (BBCH growth stage 16/17)Sowing depth: 5 cmSowing density: 45000 plants/ha

TABLE 6-143 WEED INFORMATION COMMON GROWTH % SOIL SPECIES NAME CODESTAGE COVER Bidens pilosa Blackjack BIDPI 2-4 leaf 10% Amaranthushybridus Pigweed AMAHY 2-4 leaf 10% Tagetes minuta Khaki weed TAGMI 2-6leaf  5% Portulaca oleracea Purslane POROL 4-12 leaf +  5% 2 sideshootsCommelina Wandering COMBE 4-8 leaf  5% benghalensis Jew

TABLE 6-144 ASSESSMENT DETAILS Method Comparative Efficacy HerbicideEfficacy: Number of weeds in treated versus untreated plots Selectivity:Visual phytotoxicity and yield 9. Visual phytotoxicity: BBA 1-9 scale(refer to appendix for details) 10. Yield: 20 cobs harvested at randomfrom each plot. Average grain weight per plot determined using aprecision 2 decimal scale. Statistical evaluation: ANOVA at the 95%probability using Tukeys LSD formulae Assessment 14 DAA -Efficacy/Selectivity Times- 28 DAA - Efficacy/Selectivity Days After 42DAA - Efficacy/Selectivity Application Harvest - Selectivity (DAA)

TABLE 6-145 Comparative yield of DINAMIC ® 700WDG programs YIELD(Kg/plot) Replicate TREATMENT I II III IV Mean 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago +Wet-All 2.63 2.65 2.63 1.71 2.41 a 75 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 l 2DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 2.95 2.87 2.24 2.55 2.65 a 75 g + 150 ml +100 ml/100 l 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 2.29 2.67 2.67 2.01 2.41 a100 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 l 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 2.47 2.851.79 2.22 2.33 a 100 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 l 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago +Wet-All 2.64 2.58 2.71 2.48 2.60 a 125 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 l 6DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 2.43 2.77 2.69 2.15 2.51 a 125 g + 150 ml +100 ml/100 l 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 2.47 2.72 2.622.44 2.57 a 75 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago +TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 2.52 2.66 2.09 2.88 2.54 a 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l +100 ml/100 l 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 2.84 2.49 2.472.97 2.69 a 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 10 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 2.72 2.82 2.28 2.69 2.63 a 100 g + 150 ml +1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 2.522.42 2.41 2.78 2.53 a 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 12DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 2.51 2.53 1.95 2.53 2.38 a 125g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 +Wet-All 2.10 2.41 2.61 2.51 2.41 a 250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l + 200 ml/100 l14 CALLISTO ® + Gardo Gold + COMPLIMENT ® 2.30 2.30 1.68 3.17 2.36 aSuper 260 ml + 1562 ml + 100 ml/100 l 15 Untreated control 2.32 2.422.92 3.14 2.70 a Note: Treatment means sharing the same letter do notdiffer significantly by LSD test at the 5% (α = 0.05) level ofprobability

TABLE 6-146 Comparative visual phytotoxicity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpost-emergence programs BBA VISUAL PHYTOTOXICITY SCALE (1 - no damage;9 - dead) Replicate TREATMENT Timing I II III IV Mean 1. DINAMIC ® +Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 2. DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 11 1 1 1.0 75 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 11 1.0 3. DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 100 g + 100ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 4. DINAMIC ® +Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 100 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 5. DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 125 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA1 1 1 1 1.0 6. DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 125 g +150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 7.DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 Wet-All 28 DAA 1 1 11 1.0 75 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 8.DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 Wet-All 28 DAA 1 1 11 1.0 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 9.DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 Wet-All 28 DAA 1 1 11 1.0 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 10.DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 2 1 1 2 1.5 Wet-All 28 DAA 1 1 11 1.0 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 11.DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 3 1 2 1 1.75 Wet-All 28 DAA 2 12 1 1.5 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 12.DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 3 3 2 2 2.5 Wet-All 28 DAA 3 2 22 2.25 125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 13.DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 4 3 3 3 3.25 Wet-All 28 DAA 3 33 3 3.0 250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l + 200 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 14.CALLISTO ® + Gardo Gold + 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 COMPLEMENT ® Super 28 DAA 11 1 1 1.0 260 ml + 1562 ml + 100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 15. Untreatedcontrol 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0

TABLE 6-147 Comparative visual phytotoxicity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpost-emergence programs AVERAGE % WEED CONTROL BY SPECIES TREATMENT DAAAMAHY BIDPI TAGMI POROL COMBE 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 70 90 9440 40 75 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 80 90 100 50 40 56 65 80 100 3030 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 90 96 98 60 60 75 g + 150 ml + 100ml/100 ml 28 85 100 100 60 60 56 80 100 100 35 40 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago +Wet-All 14 85 98 98 50 50 100 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 85 94 100 6055 56 75 90 100 30 30 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 92 98 98 60 65100 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 96 100 100 65 60 56 85 100 100 40 45 5DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 90 98 99 65 65 125 g + 100 ml + 100ml/100 ml 28 92 100 100 60 60 56 85 100 100 40 45 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago +Wet-All 14 98 99 99 70 70 125 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 98 100 10065 70 56 90 100 100 45 45 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 1490 98 99 60 70 75 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 28 85 100 100 65 6056 80 100 100 35 30 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 14 98 9999 70 80 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 28 96 100 100 80 70 56 90100 100 40 40 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 14 99 99 99 7585 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 28 92 100 100 70 70 56 90 100100 45 50 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 14 99 99 99 85 90100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 28 100 100 100 80 80 56 100 100100 55 60 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 14 99 99 99 85 90125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 28 100 100 100 80 85 56 100 100100 60 60 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 14 99 99 99 90 90125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 28 100 100 100 90 90 56 100 100100 80 80 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 14 100 100 100 9899 250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l + 200 ml/100 ml 28 100 100 100 94 96 56 100100 100 92 100 14 CALLISTO ® + Gardo Gold + COMPLIMENT ® 14 100 100 10094 94 Super 28 100 100 100 94 92 260 ml + 1562 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 56 100100 100 90 95 15 Untreated Control 14 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 56 0 0 0 00

The trial was conducted on a commercial maize crop produced under dryland conditions. The DINAMIC® 700WDG formulation was evaluated forherbicidal activity and crop selectivity when applied as apost-emergence spray program in tank-mix combination with Galago andTOLLA 960. The adjuvant Wet-All was applied to all treatments receivingDINAMIC® 700WDG as standard practice. Treatments were appliedpost-emergence of crop and weeds as broadcast applications over themaize rows when the maize crop was in the 6-7 leaf stage.

No visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting, chlorosis,necrosis or growth-abnormalities were observed on any of the treatmentsreceiving the tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-Allacross all rates applied.

Visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting were observedat the assessments conducted at 14 and 28 DAA in treatments receivingthe tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-Allwhere DINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at the rate of 125 g/ha and the doublerate of 250 g/ha. Symptoms of phytotoxicity were not severe and rangedfrom negligible to moderate (BBA visual phytotoxicity rating of 2 to 3)depending on the dosage rate of DINAMIC® 700WDG applied. No visualsymptoms of phytotoxicity of any nature were observed at the finalassessment conducted at 56 DAA.

The weed spectrum at the trial site was dominated by broadleaved weedsnamely Blackjack (BIDPI), Pigweed (AMAHY), Khaki weed (TAGMI) andWandering jew (COMBE). The broadleaved weed POROL was in an advancedgrowth stage at application and considered to be beyond acceptablepost-emergence application size. Efficacy evaluations were conducted at14, 28 and 56 days following application, respectively.

DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-all exhibitedcommercially acceptable levels of herbicidal activity against thebroadleaved weeds BIDPI and TAGMI in treatments receiving DINAMIC®700WDG applied at the higher rates of 100 g/ha and 125 g/ha. Thebroadleaved weed AMAHY was only commercially controlled at the hi hertank-mix rate of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago applied at 125 g/ha+150 m

/ha. None of the treatments displayed commercially acceptable levels ofherbicidal activity against the broadleaved weeds COMBE and POROL.

DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-All wereefficacious and exhibited commercially acceptable levels of herbicidalactivity against the broadleaved weeds BIDPI and TAGMI across all ratesapplied. The broadleaved weed AMAHY was commercially controlled by alltank-mix combinations where DINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at ratesexceeding 75 g/ha or where Galago was applied at 150 m

/ha. The broadleaved weeds POROL and COMBE were only commerciallycontrolled by the double rate of DINAMIC®+Galago+TOLLA+Wet-All appliedat 250 g/ha+300 m

/ha+2.0

/ha+200 m

/100

and the standard tank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+GardoGold+COMPLEMENT® Super applied at 260 m

/ha+1562 m

/ha+100 m

/100

due to the higher rate of the active ingredient Mesotrione in thesetreatments.

Compatibility

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-All and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA960+Wet-All, whether applied at single or double rates.

No visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting, chlorosis,necrosis or growth-abnormalities were observed on any of the treatmentsreceiving the tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-Allacross all rates applied.

Visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting were observedat the assessments conducted at 14 and 28 DAA in treatments receivingthe tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-Allwhere DINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at the rate of 125 g/ha and the doublerate of 250 g/ha. Stunting was not severe and ranged from negligible tomoderate according to BBA visual phytotoxicity scale.

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-All wereefficacious and exhibited commercially acceptable levels of herbicidalactivity against the broadleaved weeds BIDPI and TAGMI across all ratesapplied. AMAHY was commercially controlled by all tank-mix combinationswhere DINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at rates exceeding 75 g/ha or whereGalago was applied at 150 m

/ha. The broadleaved weeds POROL and COMBE were only commerciallycontrolled by the double rate of DINAMIC®+Galago+TOLLA+Wet-All and thestandard tank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+Gardo Gold+COMPLEMENT® Super.

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-All and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA960+Wet-All, whether applied at single or double rates.

TABLE 6-148 Anova Table Grain yield (kg/plot) Degrees of Sums of Mean FUnit freedom Squares Squares Value Reps 3 .4117 Treatments 14 .8700.6214 .5757 Error 42 4.533 .1079 Total 59 5.815 Overall mean 2.514 S. Efor Difference 0.2323 Least Significant Difference (LSD) at 95% 0.4688

TABLE 6-149 BBA Visual Phytotoxicity rating scale EQUIVALENT Scale %Description 1 0% NO DAMAGE 2 0.1-2.5% NEGLIGIBLE DAMAGE 3 2.5-5.0%MODERATE DAMAGE No effects on yield and/or quality 4 5.0-10%  Damage upto limits of commercial acceptability - if no yield loss 5 10-15%DISTINCT DAMAGE Commercially acceptable only under certain conditions-if no yield loss 6 15-25% SEVERE DAMAGE Not commercially acceptable -yield loss and quality 7 25-35% VERY SEVERE DAMAGE 8 35-68% EXTREMEDAMAGE 9  68-100% START OF WITHERING AND DEATH

R. Post-Emergence Application Against Weed in Maize

This Example compares the herbicidal selectivity and efficacy ofDINAMIC® 700WDG applied in combination with Galago and TOLLA 960 as apost-emergence application with regards to both crop and weeds inirrigated maize. Treatments and conditions are tabulated below.

TABLE 6-150 TREATMENTS Rate/ha TREATMENT Product ( 

) a.i. (g) 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago +  75 g + 100 m 

  + 100 m 

/100  

52.5 + 48 + 180 Wet-All 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago +  75 g + 150 m 

  + 100 m 

/100  

52.5 + 72 Wet-All 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 100 g + 100 m 

  + 100 m 

/100  

  70 + 48 Wet-All 4 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 100 g + 150 m 

  + 100 m 

/100  

  70 + 72 Wet-All 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 125 g + 100 m 

  + 100 m 

/100  

87.5 + 48 Wet-All 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 125 g + 150 m 

  + 100 m 

/100  

87.5 + 72 Wet-All 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago +  75 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

  + 52.5 + 48 + 960 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

180 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago +  75 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

  + 52.5 + 72 + 960 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

180 9 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 100 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

  +   70 + 48 + 960 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

180 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 100 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

  +   70 + 72 + 960 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

180 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 125 g + 100 m 

  + 1.0  

  + 87.5 + 48 + 960 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

180 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 125 g + 150 m 

  + 1.0  

  + 87.5 + 72 + 960 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 100 m 

/100  

180 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + 250 g + 300 m 

  + 2.0  

  + 175 + 144 + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 200 m 

/100  

1920 + 360 14 CALLISTO ® + Gardo 260 m 

  + 1562 m 

  + 125 + 488/293 + Gold + Complement 100 m 

/100  

  100 super 15 Untreated control — —

TABLE 6-151 Test products used Manufacturer/ Registration Product ActiveIngredient Formulation Supplier No. 1 DINAMIC ® Amicarbazone WDG ArystaLifescience 700WDG 700 g/kg 2 Galago Mesotrione 480 g/ 

SC Arysta Lifescience L. 8089 3 TOLLA 960 Metolachlor 960 g/ 

EC Arysta Lifescience L. 6794 4 Wet-All Adjuvant SL Arysta LifescienceL. 8361 5 CALLISTO ® Mesotrione 480 g/ 

SC Syngenta L. 6795 6 Gardo Gold S-Metolachlor 312.5 g/ 

SC Syngenta L. 7763 Terbuthylazine 187.5 g/ 

7 COMPLEMENT ® Adjuvant SL Syngenta L. 8169 Super

TABLE 6-152 TRIAL DESIGN Design Completely randomized design ReplicatesFour Plot size 5 m × 2.5 m = Nett/plot

TABLE 6-153 SPRAYER Sprayer CO₂ Precision Sprayer Boom 2 m aluminiumNozzle 5 × 11002 flat fan nozzles (Teejet 11002 DG) Pressure 2.7 BarApplication 200  

/ha

Spray Water Quality:

pH: 6.5EC: 0.7 mS/mSpray Volume: 200

/ha at 2.7 Bar

TABLE 6-154 WEATHER INFORMATION AT APPLICATION Temperature (max) 21.7°C. RH: 65% Wind: 0-5 km/h, NE Cloud 8/8

TABLE 6-155 SOIL PROPERTIES AT APPLICATION Clay Fraction  9% SiltFraction  5% Sand Fraction 86% pH (KCl) 6.01 Moisture Field capacity

Irrigation

None (rain-fed)

Crop

Crop: Maize

Variety: Pan 3P-736BR

Growth stage: 4-5 leaf (BBCH growth stage 14/15)

Sowing depth: 5 cm

Sowing density: 80 000 plants/ha

TABLE 6-156 WEED INFORMATION COMMON GROWTH % SOIL SPECIES NAME CODESTAGE COVER Bidens pilosa Blackjack BIDPI 2-4 leaf 25% Portulacaoleracea Purslane POROL 4-6 leaf  5% Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweedCONAR 2-4 leaf  5% Anoda cristata Anoda weed ANOCR 2-4 leaf  5%

TABLE 6-157 ASSESSMENT DETAILS YIELD (Kg/plot) Replicate TREATMENT I IIIII IV Mean 1 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 3.89 4.00 3.68 3.43 3.75 ab75 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 l 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 3.61 3.563.72 3.34 3.56 ab 75 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 l 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago +Wet-All 3.81 4.06 3.43 2.78 3.52 ab 100 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 l 4DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 3.99 4.01 3.98 3.27 3.81 ab 100 g + 150ml + 100 ml/100 l 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 3.57 3.78 3.60 3.663.65 ab 125 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 l 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All3.43 3.92 3.92 4.04 3.83 ab 125 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 l 7 DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 3.54 4.06 3.70 3.50 3.70 ab 75 g + 100 ml +1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 3.904.06 3.33 2.93 3.55 ab 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 9DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 3.52 4.27 3.80 3.32 3.73 ab 100g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 10 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 +Wet-All 4.01 3.92 3.53 4.04 3.87 ab 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100l 11 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 3.28 3.46 3.37 4.07 3.55ab 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 l 12 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA960 + Wet-All 2.94 4.14 3.39 4.01 3.62 ab 125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100ml/100 l 13 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + Wet-All 2.62 3.36 3.52 3.743.31 a  250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l + 200 ml/100 l 14 CALLISTO ® + GardoGold + COMPLIMENT ® 3.75 4.50 4.73 4.50 4.37 b  Super 260 ml + 1562 ml +100 ml/100 l 15 Untreated control 3.99 3.28 3.60 3.15 3.50 ab

TABLE 6-158 Comparative yield of DINAMIC ® 700WDG programs MethodComparative Efficacy Herbicide Efficacy: Number of weeds in treatedversus untreated plots Selectivity: Visual phytotoxicity and yield 11.Visual phytotoxicity: BBA 1-9 scale (refer to appendix for details) 12.Yield: 40 cobs harvested at random from each plot. Average grain weightper plot determined using a precision 2 decimal scale. Statisticalevaluation: ANOVA at the 95% probability using Tukeys LSD formulaeAssessment 14 DAA - Efficacy/Selectivity Times-Days 28 DAA -Efficacy/Selectivity After 42 DAA - Efficacy/Selectivity ApplicationHarvest - Selectivity (DAA) Note: Treatment means sharing the sameletter do not differ significantly by LSD test at the 5% (α = 0.05)level of probability

TABLE 6-159 Comparative visual phytotoxicity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpost-emergence programs BBA VISUAL PHYTOTOXICITY SCALE (1 - no damage;9 - dead) Replicate TREATMENT Rate/ha Timing I II III IV Mean 1DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 3 2 2 3 2.5 75 g + 100 ml + 100ml/100 ml 28 DAA 1 1 1 3 1.5 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 2 DINAMIC ® + Galago +Wet-All 14 DAA 3 2 4 3 3.0 75 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 1 1 1 11.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 3 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 3 3 2 4 3.0100 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 2 1 2 2 1.75 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 4DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 3 3 4 3 3.25 100 g + 150 ml + 100ml/100 ml 28 DAA 3 1 1 1 1.5 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 5 DINAMIC ® + Galago +Wet-All 14 DAA 4 4 3 3 3.5 125 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 1 3 2 32.25 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 6 DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 4 4 4 23.5 125 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 3 3 2 3 2.75 42 DAA 1 1 1 11.0 7 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 2 2 3 2 2.25 Wet-All 28DAA 1 1 1 2 1.25 75 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 11.0 8 DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 2 2 3 3 2.5 Wet-All 28 DAA1 1 1 1 1.0 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 9DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 4 3 4 4 3.75 Wet-All 28 DAA 1 33 2 2.25 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 10DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 4 3 3 4 3.5 Wet-All 28 DAA 1 2 13 1.75 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 11DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 4 3 4 4 3.75 Wet-All 28 DAA 3 33 3 3.0 125 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 12DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 4 4 4 3 3.75 Wet-All 28 DAA 3 33 3 3.0 125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 13DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 6 6 6 6 6.0 Wet-All 28 DAA 5 5 45 4.75 250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l + 200 ml/100 ml 42 DAA 4 4 4 4 4.0 14CALLISTO ® + Gardo Gold + 14 DAA 3 1 1 1 1.5 COMPLEMENT ® Super 28 DAA 11 1 1 1.0 260 ml + 1562 ml + 100 ml 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 15 Untreatedcontrol 14 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 28 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0 42 DAA 1 1 1 1 1.0

TABLE 6-160 Comparative visual phytotoxicity of DINAMIC ® 700WDGpost-emergence programs AVERAGE % WEED CONTROL BY SPECIES TREATMENTRate/ha TIMING BIDPI ANOCR CONAR POROL 1. DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All14 DAA 94 100 100 70 75 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 96 100 100 6056 DAA 90 100 100 60 2. DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 98 98 100 8075 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 100 100 100 70 56 DAA 100 100 10080 3. DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 99 98 100 80 100 g + 100 ml +100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 99 98 100 70 56 DAA 96 100 100 70 4. DINAMIC ® +Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 98 100 100 75 100 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28DAA 99 100 100 70 56 DAA 100 100 100 85 5. DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All14 DAA 100 100 100 80 125 g + 100 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 100 100 10075 56 DAA 100 100 100 80 6. DINAMIC ® + Galago + Wet-All 14 DAA 100 100100 80 125 g + 150 ml + 100 ml/100 ml 28 DAA 100 100 100 80 56 DAA 100100 100 94 7. DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100 99 100 85Wet-All 28 DAA 100 100 100 80 75 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 56DAA 100 100 100 85 8. DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100 100100 85 Wet-All 28 DAA 100 100 100 80 75 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100ml 56 DAA 100 100 100 85 9. DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100100 100 85 Wet-All 28 DAA 100 100 100 80 100 g + 100 ml + 1.0 l + 100ml/100 ml 56 DAA 100 100 100 90 10. DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14DAA 100 100 100 90 Wet-All 28 DAA 100 100 100 99 100 g + 150 ml + 1.0l + 100 ml/100 ml 56 DAA 100 100 100 90 11. DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA960 + 14 DAA 100 100 100 96 Wet-All 28 DAA 100 100 100 94 125 g + 100ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 56 DAA 100 100 100 92 12. DINAMIC ® +Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100 100 100 94 Wet-All 28 DAA 100 100 100100 125 g + 150 ml + 1.0 l + 100 ml/100 ml 56 DAA 100 100 100 96 13.DINAMIC ® + Galago + TOLLA 960 + 14 DAA 100 100 100 90 Wet-All 28 DAA100 100 100 100 250 g + 300 ml + 2.0 l + 200 ml/100 ml 56 DAA 100 100100 100 14. CALLISTO ® + Gardo Gold + 14 DAA 100 100 100 95 COMPLEMENT ®Super 28 DAA 100 100 100 90 260 ml + 1562 ml + 100 ml 56 DAA 100 100 100100 15. Untreated Control 14 DAA 0 0 0 0 28 DAA 0 0 0 0 56 DAA 0 0 0 0

The trial was conducted on a commercial maize crop produced under centrepivot irrigation. The DINAMIC® 700WDG formulation was evaluated forherbicidal efficacy and crop selectivity when applied as apost-emergence spray program in tank-mix combination with Galago andTOLLA 960. The adjuvant Wet-All was applied to all treatments containingDINAMIC® 700WDG as standard practice. Treatments were appliedpost-emergence of crop and weeds as broadcast applications over themaize rows when the maize crop was in the 4-5 leaf stage. Weatherconditions on the day of application were overcast and cool.

At the first assessment conducted at 14 DAA, all DINAMIC® 700WDGtreatments displayed visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form ofleaf scorching. Scorching appeared to be dosage related, with theseverity of scorching increasing along with an increase in the rate ofDINAMIC® 700WDG applied. Visual symptoms of stunting were also observedon treatments receiving DINAMIC® 700WDG at rates exceeding 75 g/ha. Atthe second assessment conducted at 28 DAA, visual symptoms ofphytotoxicity in the form of stunting were observed in tank-mixcombinations receiving the DINAMIC® 700WDG formulation exceeding therate of 75 g/ha applied. Stunting was distinct (BBA phytotoxicity class5) in tank-mix treatments receiving the double rate of DINAMIC® 700WDGapplied at 250 g/ha. Stunting was negligible to moderate (BBA class 2-3)across all other DINAMIC® 700WDG tank-mix combinations applied betweenthe rates 100-125 g/ha.

At the final assessment conducted at 42 DAA, no visual symptoms ofphytotoxicity of any nature were observed on any of the treatmentsapplied.

Yield

Tank-mix combinations of the test product DINAMIC® 700WDG appliedbetween the rates of 75-125 g/ha did not exhibit significantly differentyields compared to the standard tank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+GardoGold+COMPLEMENT® Super and the untreated control treatment.

The tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-Allapplied at the double rate of 250 g/ha+300 m

/ha+1.0

/ha+200 m

/100

displayed significantly lower yields compared to the standard tank-mixcombination of CALLISTO®+Gardo Gold+COMPLEMENT® Super. However, nosignificant yield reduction occurred when compared to the untreatedcontrol treatment.

The weed spectrum at the trial site was dominated by broadleaved weedsnamely Blackjack (BIDPI), Field bindweed (CONAR), Anoda weed (ANOCR) andPurslane (POROL). The weed spectrum varied from 2-6 leaf stage atapplication. Efficacy evaluations were conducted at 14, 28 and 56 daysfollowing application, respectively.

DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-all exhibitedcommercially acceptable levels of herbicidal activity against thebroadleaved weeds BIDPI, CONAR and ANOCR across all rates applied. Thebroadleaved weed POROL was only commercially controlled at the highertank-mix rate of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-All applied at 125 g/ha+150m

/ha+100 m

/100

.

DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-All wereefficacious and exhibited total control (100% efficacy) of thebroadleaved weeds BIDPI, CONAR and ANOCR across all rates applied. Thebroadleaved weed POROL was commercially controlled by all tank-mixcombinations where DINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at rates exceeding 75g/ha. Herbicidal activity was greatest where DINAMIC® 700WDG was appliedin tank-mix combinations with Galago at the higher rate of 150 m

/ha. The tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA960+Wet-All applied at the rate of 125 g/ha+150 m

/ha+1.0

/ha+100 m

/100

displayed a similar level of herbicidal activity as the standardtank-mix combination of CALLISTO®+Gardo Gold+COMPLEMENT® Super appliedat the registered rate of 260 m

/ha+1562 m

/ha+100 m

/ha.

Compatibility

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-All and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA960+Wet-All, whether applied at single or double rates.

All DINAMIC® 700WDG tank-mix combinations displayed visual symptoms ofphytotoxicity in the form of leaf scorching at 14 days followingapplication. Scorching appeared to be dosage related, with the severityof scorching increasing along with an increase in the rate of DINAMIC®700WDG applied.

Visual symptoms of phytotoxicity in the form of stunting were observedat the assessments conducted at 14 and 28 DAA in treatments receivingthe tank-mix combination of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-Allwhere DINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at the rates exceeding 75 g/ha.Stunting observed in plots treated with the DINAMIC® 700WDG formulationapplied between the rates of 100-125 g/ha was not severe and ranged fromnegligible to moderate according to the BBA visual phytotoxicity scale.Symptoms of stunting were distinct in treatments receiving the doublerate of DINAMIC® 700WDG applied. No visual symptoms of phytotoxicity ofany nature were observed at the assessment conducted at 42 DAA.

Tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA 960+Wet-All wereefficacious and exhibited commercially acceptable levels of herbicidalactivity against the broadleaved weeds BIDPI, CONAR and ANOCR across allrates applied. POROL was commercially controlled by all tank-mixcombinations where DINAMIC® 700WDG was applied at rates exceeding 75g/ha.

Likewise, tank-mix combinations of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-allexhibited commercially acceptable levels of herbicidal activity againstthe broadleaved weeds BIDPI, CONAR and ANOCR across all rates applied.The broadleaved weed POROL was only commercially controlled at thehigher tank-mix rate of DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-All applied at 125g/ha+150 m

/ha+100 m

/100

.

No visual symptoms of incompatibility in the form of phase separation oragglomeration were observed in any of the tank-mix combinations ofDINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+Wet-All and DINAMIC® 700WDG+Galago+TOLLA960+Wet-All, whether applied at single or double rates.

TABLE 6-161 Anova Table Grain yield (kg/plot) Degrees of Sums of Mean FUnit freedom Squares Squares Value Reps 3 0.9264 Treatments 14 3.2250.2304 1.730 Error 42 5.593 0.1332 Total 59 9.745 Overall mean 3.688 S.E for Difference 0.2580 Least Significant Difference (LSD) at 95% 0.5208

TABLE 6-162 BBA Visual Phytotoxicity rating scale EQUIVALENT Scale %Description 1 0% NO DAMAGE 2 0.1-2.5% NEGLIGIBLE DAMAGE 3 2.5-5.0%MODERATE DAMAGE No effects on yield and/or quality 4 5.0-10%  Damage upto limits of commercial acceptability - if no yield loss 5 10-15%DISTINCT DAMAGE Commercially acceptable only under certain conditions-if no yield loss 6 15-25% SEVERE DAMAGE Not commercially acceptable -yield loss and quality 7 25-35% VERY SEVERE DAMAGE 8 35-68% EXTREMEDAMAGE 9  68-100% START OF WITHERING AND DEATH

Example 7 Evaluation of Synergistic Action Between Amicarbazone andTENACITY® (Mesotrione 40%)

This Example shows the synergism in the use of the combination ofamicarbazone and mesotrione. In evaluating synergism, the data fromExample 5 above were converted to % of control. This was done based onthe data provided on a 1-9 scale detailed in Example 5. Expected valueswere computed from the % of control data by the formula for expectedcontrol=A*B/100, where A is the % of control value for herbicide A aloneand B is the % of control value for herbicide B alone.

In this Example, the source of mesotrione was TENACITY®, available fromSyngenta (Greensboro, N.C.). Rates appear as pounds of active ingredient(ai), rates as ounces per acre. Results are tabulated in Tables 7-1through 7-17 below.

TABLE 7-1 Kentucky Bluegrass Bleaching from Tenacity + Amicarbazoneapplications plus the expected responses calculated from the responsesto each herbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A)1 Exp 2 Exp 3 Exp 3/27 Exp Control — 100 100 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.0220.5 100 100 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 100 100 100 94 Tenacity 0.125 4100 100 100 100 Tenacity 0.25 8 100 100 91 91 Tenacity + Amicarbazone0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   100 100 100 100 100 100 97 94Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 100 100 100 100 100 91 9791 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   100 100 100 100 100 91 9785

TABLE 7-2 Kentucky bluegrass injury from Tenacity + Amicarbazoneapplications plus Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A) 1 Exp 2 ExpControl — 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 9183 Tenacity 0.125 4 100 100 Tenacity 0.25 8 94 90 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 97 100 94 101 Tenacity + Amicarbazone0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   63 91 59 84 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.0228 + 0.5 84 94 79 91 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   13 85 675

TABLE 7-3 Kentucky Bluearass percent cover from Tenacity + Amicarbazoneapplications plus the expected responses calculated from the responsesto each herbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A)1 Exp 2 Exp 3 Exp Control — 100 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 85 85 100Amicarbazone 0.13 3 55 53 83 Tenacity 0.125 4 67 66 91 Tenacity 0.25 877 81 89 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 74 57 76 56 97 91Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   31 37 41 35 55 75Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 61 65 61 69 87 90Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   3 42 7 43 3 74

TABLE 7-4 Kentucky Bluegrass Bleaching from Tenacity + Amicarbazoneapplications plus the expected responses calculated from the responsesto each herbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A)1 Exp 2 Exp 3 Exp 4 Exp 5 Exp 6 Exp Control — 100 100 100 100 100 100Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 100 100 100 100 97 100 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 97 9797 100 100 100 Tenacity 0.125 4 94 94 100 100 94 100 Tenacity 0.25 8 9797 97 97 100 100 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 97 94 9794 94 100 100 100 94 91 100 100 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13 4 + 3   97 91 97 91 97 97 94 100 97 94 100 100 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 91 97 91 97 94 97 94 97 94 97 100 100 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   97 94 97 94 94 94 91 97 94 100 100 100

TABLE 7-5 Mustard bleaching from Tenacity + Amicarbazone applicationsplus the expected responses calculated from the responses to eachherbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A) 1 Exp 2Exp Control — 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 119 94 Amicarbazone 0.13 3132 94 Tenacity 0.125 4 64 54 Tenacity 0.25 8 54 53 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 119 76 94 50 Tenacity + Amicarbazone0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   132 85 94 50 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.0228 + 0.5 115 65 90 50 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   132 7294 50

TABLE 7-6 Mustard injury from Tenacity + Amicarbazone applications plusthe expected responses calculated from the responses to each herbicideapplied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A) 1 Exp 2 Exp 3 Exp4 Exp 5 Exp Control — 100 100 100 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 78 7861 39 42 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 28 31 26 3 3 Tenacity 0.125 4 72 78 62 2510 Tenacity 0.25 8 84 81 62 33 17 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.0224 + 0.5 44 56 44 61 39 38 6 10 0 4 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13 4 + 3   31 20 28 24 26 16 4 1 0 0 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.0228 + 0.5 41 66 44 63 39 37 7 13 0 7 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.138 + 3   19 24 13 25 3 16 0 1 0 1

TABLE 7-7 Annual bluegrass bleaching from Tenacity + Amicarbazoneapplications plus the expected responses calculated from the responsesto each herbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A)1 Exp 2 Exp 3 Exp 4 Exp 4/2 Exp Control — 100 100 100 100 100Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 100 100 100 107 100 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 100 10091 94 88 Tenacity 0.125 4 100 100 97 91 94 Tenacity 0.25 8 97 97 91 8391 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 97 100 94 100 78 97 8297 88 94 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   100 100 100 10084 88 87 85 84 82 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 100 97100 97 91 91 93 89 94 91 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   9797 100 97 56 82 71 78 84 79

TABLE 7-8 Annual bluegrass injury from Tenacity + Amicarbazoneapplications plus the expected responses calculated from the responsesto each herbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A)1 Exp 2 Exp 3 Exp 4 Exp 5 Exp Control — 100 100 100 100 100 Amicarbazone0.022 0.5 104 104 108 96 90 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 71 61 67 53 52 Tenacity0.125 4 100 104 113 104 97 Tenacity 0.25 8 88 89 104 93 86 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 84 104 71 107 83 122 64 100 70 87Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   61 72 50 63 46 75 33 55 2850 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 81 91 68 92 71 113 6090 59 78 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   38 62 29 54 21 6911 50 14 45 Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A) 6 Exp 7 Exp Control —100 100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 85 85 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 31 24 Tenacity0.125 4 93 101 Tenacity 0.25 8 93 102 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 +0.022 4 + 0.5 41 79 40 85 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3  11 29 11 25 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 43 80 45 86Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   8 29 13 25

TABLE 7-9 Green Foxtail bleaching from Tenacity + Amicarbazoneapplications plus the expected responses calculated from the responsesto each herbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A)1 Exp 2 Exp 3 Exp 4 Exp 5 Exp Control — 100 100 100 100 100 Amicarbazone0.022 0.5 100 104 104 104 160 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 100 104 104 104 106Tenacity 0.125 4 50 52 65 80 142 Tenacity 0.25 8 41 38 49 71 159Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 78 50 81 54 81 68 94 83164 227 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   100 50 104 54 10068 100 83 109 151 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 78 41 8440 77 51 90 73 164 256 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   97 4197 40 97 51 104 73 179 169

TABLE 7-10 Green Foxtail injury from Tenacity + Amicarbazoneapplications plus the expected responses calculated from the responsesto each herbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A)1 Exp 2 Exp 3 Exp 4 Exp 5 Exp Control — 100 100 100 100 100 Amicarbazone0.022 0.5 97 94 97 97 102 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 67 69 81 84 77 Tenacity0.125 4 74 66 59 70 71 Tenacity 0.25 8 66 56 41 40 48 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 49 72 38 62 31 58 46 68 49 72Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   19 50 13 45 16 48 20 59 2155 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 32 64 25 53 25 39 17 3921 49 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   10 44 13 39 6 33 7 3311 37 Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A) 6 Exp 7 Exp Control — 100100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 97 268 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 73 144 Tenacity0.125 4 68 109 Tenacity 0.25 8 45 64 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 +0.022 4 + 0.5 38 66 81 291 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3  21 50 37 156 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 24 44 46 170Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   4 33 34 91

TABLE 7-11 Crabgrass bleaching from Tenacity + Amicarbazone applicationsplus the expected responses calculated from the responses to eachherbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A) 1 Exp 2Exp 3 Exp 4 Exp 5 Exp Control — 100 100 100 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.0220.5 97 100 100 100 97 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 100 100 100 100 100 Tenacity0.125 4 38 31 22 25 22 Tenacity 0.25 8 47 38 28 31 31 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 75 36 59 31 50 22 59 25 69 21Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   84 38 81 31 91 22 88 25 8422 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 66 45 56 38 59 28 69 3166 30 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   94 47 97 38 100 28 10031 97 31 Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A) 6 Exp 7 Exp 8 Exp Control— 100 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 97 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 100100 100 Tenacity 0.125 4 22 84 100 Tenacity 0.25 8 44 81 100 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 66 21 97 84 100 100 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   78 22 97 84 100 100 Tenacity +Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 59 42 97 81 100 100 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   94 44 100 81 100 100

TABLE 7-12 Crabgrass injury from Tenacity + Amicarbazone applicationsplus the expected responses calculated from the responses to eachherbicide applied singly. Rate (lbs Rate Treatment ai/A) (oz/A) 1 Exp 2Exp 3 Exp 4 Exp 5 Exp 6 Exp Control — 100 100 100 100 100 100Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 94 100 100 97 97 94 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 100 100100 94 94 94 Tenacity 0.125 4 47 47 41 19 16 25 Tenacity 0.25 8 41 38 3419 19 25 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 50 44 28 47 25 4122 18 13 15 16 23 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   28 47 2247 6 41 6 18 6 15 9 23 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 4438 38 38 22 34 9 18 6 18 13 23 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 +3   9 41 9 38 0 34 0 18 0 18 0 23

TABLE 7-13 Crabgrass cover from Tenacity + Amicarbazone applicationsplus the expected responses calculated from the responses to eachherbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A) 1 Exp 2Exp 3 Exp Control — 100 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 88 94 100Amicarbazone 0.13 3 67 67 72 Tenacity 0.125 4 22 28 13 Tenacity 0.25 810 13 6 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 4 19 0 26 3 13Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   0 15 0 19 3 9 Tenacity +Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 7 9 0 12 3 6 Tenacity + Amicarbazone0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   0 7 0 9 9 4

TABLE 7-14 Floratam St. Augustine bleaching from Tenacity + Amicarbazoneapplications plus the expected responses calculated from the responsesto each herbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A)1 Exp 2 Exp 3 Exp 4 Exp 5 Exp Control — 100 100 100 100 100 Amicarbazone0.022 0.5 100 100 100 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 100 100 100 100 97Tenacity 0.125 4 97 88 75 78 78 Tenacity 0.25 8 88 78 63 66 53Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 88 97 84 88 69 75 78 78 6378 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   97 97 91 88 81 75 88 7884 76 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 88 88 72 78 56 63 6966 69 53 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   88 88 81 78 66 6372 66 56 51 Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A) 6 Exp 7 Exp 8 ExpControl — 100 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 100 100 100 Amicarbazone0.13 3 97 100 100 Tenacity 0.125 4 72 81 100 Tenacity 0.25 8 56 63 100Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 59 72 66 81 100 100Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   78 70 91 81 100 100Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 72 56 78 63 100 100Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   56 54 63 63 100 100

TABLE 7-15 Floratam St. Augustine turf quality as affected by Tenacity +Amicarbazone applications plus the expected responses calculated fromthe responses to each herbicide applied singly. Treatment Rate (lbsai/A) Rate (oz/A) 1 Exp Control — 100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 75Amicarbazone 0.13 3 58 Tenacity 0.125 4 83 Tenacity 0.25 8 83 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 67 63 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 +0.13  4 + 3   42 49 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 83 63Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   67 49

TABLE 7-16 Sapphire St. Augustine bleaching from Tenacity + Amicarbazoneapplications plus the expected responses calculated from the responsesto each herbicide applied singly. Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A)1 Exp 2 Exp 3 Exp 4 Exp 5 Exp Control — 100 100 100 100 100 Amicarbazone0.022 0.5 100 100 100 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.13 3 94 100 100 100 100Tenacity 0.125 4 88 88 94 100 100 Tenacity 0.25 8 88 88 69 81 75Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 88 88 88 88 81 94 88 10088 100 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   94 82 94 88 88 9494 100 88 100 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 94 88 88 8888 69 94 81 94 75 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   100 82 8888 75 69 75 81 63 75 Rate Rate Treatment (lbs ai/A) (oz/A) 6 Exp 7 Exp 8Exp Control — 100 100 100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 94 100 100 Amicarbazone0.13 3 100 100 100 Tenacity 0.125 4 100 94 100 Tenacity 0.25 8 75 81 100Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 81 94 81 94 100 100Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   88 100 100 94 100 100Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 + 0.022 8 + 0.5 81 70 88 81 100 100Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   69 75 75 81 100 100

TABLE 7-17 Sapphire St. Augustine turf quality as affected by Tenacity +Amicarbazone applications plus the expected responses calculated fromthe responses to each herbicide applied singly. Treatment Rate (lbsai/A) Rate (oz/A) 1 Exp Control — 100 Amicarbazone 0.022 0.5 100Amicarbazone 0.13 3 75 Tenacity 0.125 4 100 Tenacity 0.25 8 100Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.022 4 + 0.5 100 100 Tenacity +Amicarbazone 0.125 + 0.13  4 + 3   75 75 Tenacity + Amicarbazone  0.25 +0.022 8 + 0.5 100 100 Tenacity + Amicarbazone 0.25 + 0.13 8 + 3   75 75

The Kentucky bluegrass data shows that the high rate ofTenacity+Amicarbazone is injurious and synergistic to Kentuckybluegrass. The high rate of amicarbazone appears to be the driver ofthis response. Bleaching in mustard was reduced by the combinationtreatment, indicating that amicarbazone prevents some of the bleachingresponses typical from mesotrione. Injury data shows some synergisminitially. Annual bluegrass clearly shows synergism, particularly fromthe low rate of amicarbazone. The high rate of amicarbazone wassufficient to get reasonable control of annual bluegrass by itself.

Green foxtail results indicate syngergism, both in terms of increasedinjury from the combination treatments and in terms of reduction inbleaching from the combination.

1-22. (canceled)
 23. A synergistic composition comprising: a.amicarbazone; b. mesotrione; and c. a third herbicide.
 24. Thecomposition according to claim 23, wherein the third herbicide isselected from a group consisting of2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone (Clomazone),3-cyclohexyl-6-dimethylamino-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione(Hexazinone), 4-methyl-2-chlorophenoxyacetic acid (MCPA),2-chloro-4-(ethylamine)-6-(isopropylamine)-s-triazine (Atrazine),N-ethyl-N′-(1-methylethyl)-6-(methylthio)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine(Ametryn), N-(3,4-dichlophenyl)-N,N-dimethyl urea (Diuron),5-cyclopropyl-4-(2-methylsulfonyl-4-trifluoromethylbenzoyl)isoxazole(Isoxaflutole),4-amino-6-tert-butyl-4,5-dihydro-3-methylthio-1,2,4-triazin-5-one(Metribuzin), 1-(5-tert-butyl-1,3,4-thiadiazol-2-yl)-1,3-dimethylurea(Tebuthiuron),2′,4′-dichloro-5′-(4-difluoromethyl-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-S-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)methanesulfonanilide(Sulfentrazone), N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine (Glyphosate), dimethylaminesalt of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D Amine), an herbicide ofthe chloroacetamide class, for example,2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1-methylethoxy)methyl]acetamide(Propisochlor), 2-chloro-N-ethoxymethyl-6′-ethylacet-o-toluidide(Acetochlor),2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide(Metolachlor), 2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1S)-2-methoxy-1-methylethyl]acetamide (S-Metolachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(methoxymethyl)acetamide (Alachlor),and N-(butoxymethyl)-2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)acetamide(Butachlor),N-[[(2Z)-2-butenyloxy]methyl]-2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)acetamide(Butenachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-[(2-methylpropoxy)methyl]acetamide(Delachlor), N-(chloroacetyl)-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)glycine(Diethatyl),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxyethyl)acetamide(Dimethachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(1H-pyrazol-1-ylmethyl)acetamide(Metazachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(2-propoxyethyl)acetamide(Pretilachlor), 2-chloro-N-(1-methylethyl)-N-phenylacetamide(Propachlor), 2-chloro-N-(1-methyl-2-propynyl)-N-phenylacetamide(Prynachlor),N-(butoxymethyl)-2-chloro-N-[2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-6-methylphenyl]acetamide(Terbuchlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-[(3-methoxy-2-thienyl)methyl]acetamide(Thenylchlor), and2-chloro-N-(2,3-dimethylphenyl)-N-(1-methylethyl)acetamide (Xylachlor),and mixtures thereof.
 25. The composition according to claim 24, whereinthe third herbicide comprises metolachlor, S-metolachlor, orcombinations thereof.
 26. A composition comprising: a) amicarbazone; b)mesotrione; c) a third herbicide; and d) an adjuvant.
 27. Thecomposition according to claim 26, wherein the third herbicide isselected from a group consisting of2-[(2-chlorophenyl)methyl]-4,4-dimethyl-3-isoxazolidinone (Clomazone),3-cyclohexyl-6-dimethylamino-1-methyl-1,3,5-triazine-2,4(1H,3H)-dione(Hexazinone), 4-methyl-2-chlorophenoxyacetic acid (MCPA),2-chloro-4-(ethylamine)-6-(isopropylamine)-s-triazine (Atrazine),N-ethyl-N′-(1-methylethyl)-6-(methylthio)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine(Ametryn), N-(3,4-dichlophenyl)-N,N-dimethyl urea (Diuron),5-cyclopropyl-4-(2-methylsulfonyl-4-trifluoromethylbenzoyl)isoxazole(Isoxaflutole),4-amino-6-tert-butyl-4,5-dihydro-3-methylthio-1,2,4-triazin-5-one(Metribuzin), 1-(5-tert-butyl-1,3,4-thiadiazol-2-yl)-1,3-dimethylurea(Tebuthiuron),2′,4′-dichloro-5′-(4-difluoromethyl-4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)methanesulfonanilide(Sulfentrazone), N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine (Glyphosate), dimethylaminesalt of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D Amine), an herbicide ofthe chloroacetamide class, for example,2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1-methylethoxy)methyl]acetamide(Propisochlor), 2-chloro-N-ethoxymethyl-6′-ethylacet-o-toluidide(Acetochlor),2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide(Metolachlor),2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-[(1S)-2-methoxy-1-methylethyl]acetamide(S-Metolachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(methoxymethyl)acetamide (Alachlor),and N-(butoxymethyl)-2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)acetamide(Butachlor),N-[[(2Z)-2-butenyloxy]methyl]-2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)acetamide(Butenachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-[(2-methylpropoxy)methyl]acetamide(Delachlor), N-(chloroacetyl)-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)glycine(Diethatyl),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxyethyl)acetamide(Dimethachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-(1H-pyrazol-1-ylmethyl)acetamide(Metazachlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-diethylphenyl)-N-(2-propoxyethyl)acetamide(Pretilachlor), 2-chloro-N-(1-methylethyl)-N-phenylacetamide(Propachlor), 2-chloro-N-(1-methyl-2-propynyl)-N-phenylacetamide(Prynachlor),N-(butoxymethyl)-2-chloro-N-[2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-6-methylphenyl]acetamide(Terbuchlor),2-chloro-N-(2,6-dimethylphenyl)-N-[(3-methoxy-2-thienyl)methyl]acetamide(Thenylchlor), and2-chloro-N-(2,3-dimethylphenyl)-N-(1-methylethyl)acetamide (Xylachlor),and mixtures thereof.
 28. The composition according to claim 27, whereinthe third herbicide comprises metolachlor, S-metolachlor, orcombinations thereof.
 29. The composition according to claim 26, whereinthe adjuvant is an ethoxylated propoxylated fatty amine, apolyether-polymethylsiloxane-copolymer, an alcohol ethoxylate, orcombinations thereof.
 30. The composition according to claim 26, furthercomprising a safener.
 31. The composition according to claim 30, whereinthe safener comprises dichlormid, terbuthylazine, or combinationsthereof.
 32. The composition according to claim 26, further comprising aherbicidally acceptable diluent or carrier.
 33. The compositionaccording to claim 26, wherein the composition comprises a solid orliquid form.
 34. The composition according to claim 26, wherein thecomposition comprises an emulsifiable concentrate, wettable powder,granule, dust, oil spray or aerosol.
 35. The composition according toclaim 26, wherein the composition provides synergistic control of one ormore weeds.
 36. The composition according to claim 35, wherein the oneor more weeds is a broadleaf weed.
 37. The composition according toclaim 35, wherein the one or more weeds is selected from the groupconsisting of mustard, Poa annua, green foxtail, crabgrass, blackjack,pigweed, khaki weed, crab-finger grass, large thornapple, purslane,dwarf marigold, field bindweed, Bidens pilosa, Portulaca oleracea, Anodacristata, Convolvulus arvensis, Datura ferox, Schkuhria pinnata,Amaranthus hybridus, Tagetes minuta, Digitaria sanquinalis, Cyperusesculentus, Commelina benghalensis, Rottboelia exaltata, Ipomoeapurpurea, Amaranthus spinosus, Eleusine indica, Euphorbia andcombinations thereof.
 38. A method of controlling weeds at a locus,wherein said method comprises: applying to the locus a composition, thecomposition comprising: a) amicarbazone, b) mesotrione, c) a thirdherbicide, and d) optionally an adjuvant.
 39. The method according toclaim 38, wherein the weed is present within a crop.
 40. The methodaccording to claim 39, wherein the crop is selected from the groupconsisting of cereals, rice, maize, sorghum, sugar cane, cotton, canola,grass, turf grass, barley, potato, sweet potato, sunflower, rye, oats,wheat, corn, soybean, sugar beet, tobacco, safflower, tomato, alfalfa,pineapple and cassava.
 41. The method according to claim 38, wherein theweed is a broadleaf weed.
 42. The method according to claim 38, whereinthe weed is selected from the group consisting of mustard, Poa annua,green foxtail, crabgrass, blackjack, pigweed, khaki weed, crab-fingergrass, large thornapple, purslane, dwarf marigold, field bindweed,Bidens pilosa, Portulaca oleracea, Anoda cristata, Convolvulus arvensis,Datura ferox, Schkuhria pinnata, Amaranthus hybridus, Tagetes minuta,Digitaria sanquinalis, Cyperus esculentus, Commelina benghalensis,Rottboelia exaltata, Ipomoea purpurea, Amaranthus spinosus, Eleusineindica, Euphorbia and combinations thereof.
 43. The method according toclaim 38, wherein the composition is applied as a pre-emergencetreatment.
 44. The method according to claim 38, wherein the compositionis applied as a post-emergence treatment.
 45. The method according toclaim 38, wherein the herbicidal composition is applied as a readymixture or as a tank mixture.